


-J- 

N G - 





o 

fy '>v o 'iv^^xN' :^r 




■^fi^ .'^ 9>' '■<? ^'^i^;r'-j> 'dr 

" ‘‘\'°' ’ ’ ‘K'^’ 


* * 
^ <v v- 



^. .^q,/"vo.oo^,.\/<^.-. "o 


O c 55 J?< ^ 


- <if V °o 

V- 


o %^-<y o 




’-'* ■ ■ ■ '>-i&-.V ■ ‘l^'.-mk-X ■ ■ ‘<ft*^-' 

J8tj;^i X ■:^:- '8? ■•:*■: ■'»' : » 


x\ \w:° 

° «S5S 


“ XX Xf-X Xs^ 

P/ /\ %“V^V''W*" 

o'..^».- Ao^ .'•^^ t "bv^ Xo^ .'■iS^l 

^ ~ iP< 


^ov^ ; 

x^Xj t 

x^A o s®; XX 

^ '^dx ^ ^ 



.\(r *^0, 


• o X *, W.’ A X''^-'x . X 
^’•V5,°^ <^/” .X.^v’•Xcv '•'A'* X. ■ 

»A* '"xx i^\ \f 

»®ff° XX l^W'X’Xo xx<?-. 


x>''^ » . 

V o iVx^osAK Ay ^'^5 z£3TS:^^ ax ^ 'N ^ ^ ^ 

Xq'” » '•■‘^ COXO.AX ” “ ' X** '•"«,Xo'° • ‘■‘X'.‘'’"°*/X*^ * * cO^t' 
/- X„X XoX •»“oX X>o^ .N 


,.VA 




> X X»"' 
• XX * 

xx^ » 


V (A . 


A 

Ar 






!2 




'-if. 


^ov^ f»^'. • *“: W ''•f/-d^ :M 


.«bJ 


V. 

o ^.Hi^ •;, ^;pc; 

r 'v.A ^ ^ C^ ^ 

> — ^•t ■'■ 


o » ®s® * 




VS 

': w °-^»'. \o^ ' 

o !> 

^ ^ju ‘^/IW .'I ^ 


^ A. A ^ ^ ^l\^S^r9/| _ .O* ^ ^ 


^ov 


_ y/ >r>i!;^’*=^ ^ r'^X, ^ O aV^’T » ^ 

^w.' o’ '\\‘Wffj 'o ^ "c o’ ’■^a.V 

*°'”^^^r'“o. V'”‘ v^,‘**’-J\.''°'‘°ld^°»'«o, V''’“Vt'”"'-°V*°“°’o^ r'*»/v 


^ ^OV 

o 

j< ■'vx>^j:s^ <,'’ O 

'O. - 



° w « 

« \ 
r Vi 

%o^ .'■,^&: ’bv^ 

1 O ^ 



<i5°,t. 

.- - . -s- 


?* ’Vx 

'.^i' 


>0 

Vx ^O K 

. ■= ” - 


-. .™»; W 

im\ \/ /^’= sM^\/fm/pi\\A 

\ ° 



V. S. '* ^y/yy>^ ^ 

i> 


• ON C 


•i K :#; y i#; K iM'; U -M'- H -I 

y- •••?->■"' ’t?f-' ■ -X? ••y*' '‘Vf- ■ •.S’x •■•y"’- ■ .!*< '" 

. V^v -X-O.W/ y''\ '''^' 

> O -<• 










t 




r 




I > 

fc'- 






« 




' < 


t 





1 


1 » 


t 



• > 


M 


f 



I . V • 

'I 



^ ■<( 


« 4 


I 


/ 


I 


I 


I I 


• I 


i 


I 












NOAA Estuary-of-the-Month 
Seminar Series No. 8 


6^ 


Puget Sound: 

Issues, Resources, 

Status, and Management 



May 1988 



U S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

NOAA Estuarine Programs Office 

















NOAA Estuary-of-the-Month 
Seminar Series No. 8 

Puget Sound: 

Issues, Resources, 

Status, and Management 


Proceedings of a Seminar 
Held January 21, 1987 
Washington, D.C. 


U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 
C. William Verity, Secretary 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

William E. Evans, Under Secretary 

NOAA Estuarine Programs Office 
Virginia K. Tippie, Director 


* 7 ^ 

\a/ a "P ?//■ 




The NOAA Estuarine Programs Office 
presents 


AN ESTUARY-OF-THE-MONTH-SEMINAR 
PUGET SOUND 

ISSUES, RESOURCES, STATUS, AND MANAGEMENT 


January 21, 1987 

U.S. Department of Commerce 
14th and Constitution Avenue, N.W. 
Room 4830 
Washington, D.C. 


Ill 



i 


•i |1 » ft ■ •' .V 


'm 





tlif- 



fiC| 


r'i* 



k 









I 


1 X'■ -i-:^^ JNXf* '‘*’1 



rk 


I ' . : 'i 

f • * *5^ 5 1 f 

U* I 


Oftit rt^t r 




I f 


fc:*3 


J. 





TABLE OF CONTENTS 


Page 

PREFACE vii 

Alyn C. Duxbury 

PUGET SOUND, A FJORD-LIKE ESTUARY 1 

Alyn C. Duxbury 

SOURCES OF CONTAMINATION IN PUGET SOUND 13 

Diane E. Strayer and Spyros P. Pavlou 

BIOLOGICAL INDICATIONS OF POLLUTION IN PUGET SOUND 29 

Edward R. Long 

BACTERIAL CONTAMINATION OF SHELLFISH IN PUGET SOUND, 47 

WASHINGTON - A GROWING CONCERN 
John W. Armstrong and Daniel P. Cheney 

PUGET SOUND SEDIMENTS: A SOURCE AND SINK OF 65 

CONTAMINANTS 
Robert C. Barrick 

TOXIC CHEMICALS IN FISH: EFFECTS ON THEIR HEALTH AND 83 

REPRODUCTION 

Bruce B. McCain, Sin-Lam Chan, Usha Varanasi, 

Margaret M. Krahn, and Donald W. Brown 

CONTAMINANT LEVELS IN THE EDIBLE PORTION OF 111 

RECREATIONALLY CAUGHT FISH FROM PUGET SOUND, 

WASHINGTON 

Marsha L. Landolt, David A. Kalman, and 
Ahmad E. Nevissi 

THE PUGET SOUND ESTUARY PROGRAM: MANAGING FOR 135 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS 
Catherine Krueger and John Underwood 

THE PLAN FOR PUGET SOUND'S FUTURE 149 

Kirval Skinnarland, Kathy Fletcher, and 
John Dohrmann 

POLLUTION MANAGEMENT IN WASHINGTON STATE 155 

Andrea Beatty Riniker 

LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND CLEAN WATER: FULFILLING 159 

THE AGENDA 
Tim Douglas 


V 



HO Tj.jiAr 



MB' 

L$\f 


fj 


Pi. 


Vi- 


?a 


r»j 


I ' ' 


tf l 


PM 


eiu 



HD/ ^igt5iq 

y •D rtf I 


HTa-(Tjioi.*<r 4 c m*'a 

Vi'JCKt/n “,,'■> nviA 


'IK.fQ. 

UC1V 


; 1 

•g €sc“5 


:tam - A rV(>o ^lo axm/oj? 


i« 'lii,V ti '*.1 .a 9f 1 c-1 a 


Qffa02 

,frVfiRj: ^11 


H'£ Hciry'-M,.>T 


iMof'jMii*/* . _ir:u’wifoid 

..' 7 ; .M 




A - iauT»3W''n^ 

.o :«i(if4a tilt*, r'’ *^ :J«*nA .W niiox^ 




cj;-' 


^ HO /iinu aC^'QfS A r^jHi Ji^ipfja iviDtr^ 

'TATtioa'-.? 

’ j T iadui? :|^.l 




i 'i'-1 Kri cUil*Jte^< iD 

^ ^ . MoriouuoHgH^ , 

. <i44v ,^fr.1D .8 joi/tE ^ 


ici ,* n Airc >#£ TvtAMUM^rMOD^ 

.nrr:;^ vr .q ,, - i T>'0-.!.V3 Y U4V*oiTA:g^':)aj4 

nrw >kih;!aw 

‘-HTS. ,r!r.»Mr)J .A b.V..^: .JiAjSTVAj .J n(1a%&M 

;«atv«l! .S bfcm£<A 


'lo 




‘^ii>AWWI :KA>ii»0>l'-. ‘jiUUTlia a\VJOZ T.HOin HHT 

c^- :i'X'. , r A't i4Jt'H;4o>i i T?Md 

ti«-o'./, i-i»tjfii; iuizL bur. _.-.vi“r&,-iifiO 


’V. <Ti(H i , HOT!} liA.n 3HT 

•^rnMttrtoO nrloL 


aTA/.2 MOr.vMUiG-^w i 'l*i: UiH. -WAX MOITtlLioq 

*; s>X i ('! I '1 ' f I jB9yi GBibnA 



OHio-t I w-ri ;«rri aw M4i4d. (tha .i'lAiHHifcirvoc. jaoqi 

' ATTltaDA 5?in’ 

, ^^lOLnip^ CI.IT 


y- 1,;- 






t#4. 


..JUriidL’,i 


, 4 



Preface 


Alyn C. Duxbury 
Washington Sea Grant Program 

In September 1986, Dr. Howard S. Harris, Ocean Assessments Division, NOAA, 
and I met in Seattle with Dr. James Thomas, NOAA Estuarine Programs Office, to 
discuss featuring Puget Sound in the Estuary-of-the-Month Seminar Series. As a 
result, I volunteered to assemble a one-day program of speakers and to 
coordinate the publication of their papers. 

Puget Sound Studies 

Like many major estuarine environments, the Puget Sound Region is a place 
of intensive study in many fields. To what extent the Sound has been used or 
abused often seems to be a function of whom one talks to and his or her 
particular interests. Political and resource management interests abound in 
the Pacific Northwest and frequently bring together Federal, state, county, and 
municipal agencies, as well as public and private industries to address issues, 
uses, problems, and solutions. 

Seminar Topics 

A one-day seminar is not long enough to cover all the activities, groups, 
and research effort presently ongoing in this dynamic marine arena. Therefore, 
it was necessary to select among many possible topics. This does not mean, 
however, that those topics not included are unimportant. 

In organizing the seminar we decided to showcase two problems that have 
received much attention and that are considered to be most important to the 
conservation and development of the Sound and its resources: 

o Toxicants - their presence and distribution in the Sound's urban 
bay sediments, their point and non-point sources, and their resulting 
biological impacts; and 

o Sewage Contamination - the bacterial contamination from sewage 
treatment plant effluent and from non-point land runoff that does not 
destroy shellfish resources, but does preclude commercial sales from 
contaminated beds. 

In the sessions that resulted from these plans, speakers reviewed ways that 
agencies-Federal, state, and local-have responded to these problems and 
described management strategies to counter-act them. They also described ways 
that management policies are creating useful interactions among agencies at 
different levels of government. 

We are pleased to provide this information about Puget Sound and in doing 
so, we hope that it will foster a better understanding of Puget Sound as a 
unique estuarine environment with unique problems and solutions. 


Vll 




} nr'^A 

^ T.*i» jof.O nt# >'.‘ W 

• ,'V'4 "' c«i. M *>»fv» '*J ,-«Vr f«| 

O' •sfi'i.'' (ej AArV mmnt •*' ^Ij’? ^■‘ n1 ! bfNI 

L - 'It--' iwwft .* .llnt7^• - -^^( |,;^uA ;5tHHftfsx' r,--.^ib 

Hpil^mPIpl!'. * ii« ' 'y.n- r. >1.’• i'*!^**, h*?'I .'I "*<l 

r fV'.» •' .n^ >.1 3ifl’ t 

bffUiO^ 

^,'w>A'^ ♦' ^1 .,f( •-•<•."* ‘l>M,'t''i»*'ii, t I. jre*) K>^«rti vfWin7 »-1'i ^ 

>0 \j9^) /‘*^**! t» ,“*1 tifn.r •* M,u )hi^ t I ! .' f*w' / '.ri If* y'-'I-'W* »} U} 

ir >H< WM6 0* - "J ' I, I , ^ OJ ■ V» ,-»^!> .. 'i 

n\ lij'i'kiiic # 1 .' t f ' ii sif . ,n ■ Mr*.«u rtf>q 

!»••»♦ t»;f H‘ jift. it?! ly.i • nr* \') fvtMtfUo^^ f*\nf A sHi , 3 

-. , i,j M I #•’ I . 11 , > m {!»/✓ 

< 11 'ithbn» .wir'i.-ifJHf i 

<f3ifpT '2 

‘ • W* i«> A* <• '■'• *1 tf,nl^la^ ylib ono A Vfl 

^ . ftA , ,t, ,,, '■* IfWiS 

lt.\, ■'itfi ’’ ' I ' * *jr A<A2iir*-5 ’ >.tM jit■ M 

• ;• ?«. lrMfu>i,o.. ' Jr^* -y.-c.'t' in/*; 

K<tt -■x/j '■tj-n*>yifiil^ ti ’t^’ -ky n •* ^n*tjnp^K> f»l ^ 

‘iiil til ??»/tti '*1 ui b-'■Aiyttti' »i- un hx- ilaitm ] 

^ .AP»i»tii.i *«’ F'f ‘ “ *, .’, V ; I', .rt -' .■, tnyfftyrrmn^ 

OA^ilLi » -yib Ji ■'i.., . ■ .7l|i I *, i^,'‘rj<n ^ 

"■* I'K'fH bfifi U'lo i» -XT 

^u.t 

r-i-il uo iii I kftfjeiiUl •'/*fi .M Tir.-MO 1 ^ 

kif* ?'M.b ruli u u. nxai itmoniirt rrwi*t .,,. .jii) ir.sfninrtJ :.i^| 

-iii’rt • = u,» - Mtir . >.'u<r»t4ti| irifi# |1( ' .4^ :A /Ir ^ 

XfyJ *ft>}i> ffnrk,tH»3 J 

t'I #♦. .</ f.U) b ' ' I .f!r*#«1 »• nl ft| ,^1 

. Ijih .MMhV.i i Wi\u r:, *j^M, . .KK*rtT| bfU 

r Ici-V” - ''■ feji?'/ ri .. I.-. ' ■" l"iTiR*jrr'n«;- r.-.-t,-,i) J 

U» I'l', tj I'l /it • (tfa j. ' (m *ii wi'ij tfl'i/.frj ' (It 

^ lO’lMftrilakv^cO ^o ; -itlktl 

W.lh r*l lu;, I, , j, U .0 tiiti i ^Uv. ..j ol mtf; ] 

t 4* >• j , J m. i.MVitijil : r. 1M>'1 |l»w M U.<i| '1 

rfiMI# . - «M»ii v' .-il/;'. j Vjpint4 «b^A< ! i/rvi<ntvtt9 'H,ptnu 


I 



PUGET SOUND, A FJORD-LIKE ESTUARY 


Alyn C. Duxbury 
Washington Sea Grant Program 
University of Washington 
Seattle, Washington 


In the Pacific Northwest there are a series of glacially scoured, inter¬ 
connected channels that form the Strait of Juan de Fuca, Georgia Strait 
in Canada, and Puget Sound in the State of Washington. Puget Sound is 

the southernmost portion of this system and centers on 47° N latitude. 

Documentation of Puget Sound dates back to Captain George Vancouver's 
exploratory visit in 1792. He penetrated the Sound as far south as 
Blake Island with the HMS Discovery and anchored. He then sent his young 
lieutenant, Peter Puget, in a small boat to explore farther inland. As a 
reward for Puget's efforts, the area south of the present Tacoma Narrows 
was named Puget's Sound. The main basin or channel between the Narrows 
and the entrance at the north was named Admiralty Inlet. Port Gardner, 
Possession Sound and Hood's Canal completed the roster of the principal 
components of this inland sea. 

No one has been willing to leave the original names alone or to retain 
their geographical relationships. Today the commonly accepted nomen¬ 
clature and subdivisions of the Sound based on defensible oceanographic 
and geographic criteria use Puget Sound to refer to the total body of 
water south and east of a line between Partridge Point on Whidbey Island 
and Point Wilson at Port Townsend. 

This body of water is then subdivided into Hood Canal, South Sound, 

Whidbey Basin and the main or central basin. Even this is not sacred and 
with each new law or regulation that pertains to the Sound, the writers 
are compelled to redefine the boundaries for Puget Sound. At present some 
legislation expands Puget Sound north and west to the Canadian boundary 
and half way out the Strait of Juan de Fuca. 


*This paper was supported by a grant from the Washington Sea Grant 
program under grant no. NA86AA-D-SG044 from the National Sea Grant 
Program, NOAA, U.S. Dept, of Commerce. 


1 






Caiid.'dnGuH \'^"> '•. \ 

•1 ''lands ■%. ''^..../ \ 


V 


Vancouver 

Island 




>. n'^'v’v Bellingham 

. jA.^ , 'O SVl m. ^ 


/•• r-'^ .' 

iFuaely \ "^X'''x 


‘‘-"V - ^ iVl ff'oay 

. ^nr^A- ^ i ^\c ZBT 

^ ■■■0--S ^3-V^->->.- 

. 

. '^'S. ’^" *> ■’ \4 ' ftj^n San Juan 

. v.^ ^islands 

- .• .# 



Sksgii Rivff 


K A 

"■ ^ 
r/ -®^' 


•' 

Port Angeles 


r ..#■'' 

-) OmimwW 

’EdiHiDS".. 


Olympic Peninsula 


<1 

^ 'g I - 

\ ^ 

Port Townsend**'^ 

•f \v '^'^\ 

_ 5 P(W 







J- % 

Omp< lfii0t 


^Shinglon 


^Seattle ^ 


\*Renton 



Ski^omish Rivef 




f 




Puget Sound and Its Approaches 



Source: Washington Sea Grant Prograni 


2 






In view of the ever-changing limits of the Sound, quoted numbers for 
volume, surface area, mean depth, miles of shoreline and number of islands 
mean little unless the boundaries are carefully and accurately specified. 
Hereafter, any reference to Puget Sound in this paper means that body of 
water bounded at Deception Pass and the north end of Admiralty Inlet. If 
a greater region is to be referred to, then descriptors such as Puget 
Sound and adjacent waters, the greater Puget Sound region, or specific 
names for adjacent areas will be used. 

Puget Sound proper has a shoreline length of 1,157 nautical miles. Its 
surface area at mean high water is 767.6 sq. nautical miles. It contains 
a volume of 26.5 cu. nautical miles at mean high water and gains and loses 
a mean intertidal volume of 1.27 cu. nautical miles each change of the 
tide (McLelIan, 1954). These numbers give the initial clues to why Puget 
Sound is unique among all estuarine systems in the continental United 
States and why Puget Sound responds in its own way to both natural and 
anthropogenic stress. 

The volume and surface area can be used to determine the mean depth of the 
Sound, 210 ft. This depth takes into consideration all the small, 
shallow, appended inlets as well as the deeper main channels. Table 1. 

If the mean depth of the main basin alone is calculated it is found to be 
329 ft. Main basin depths range from 0 to 930 ft. maximum with typical 
midchannel depths of 600-800 ft. The small appended inlets attached to 
the main channels have mean depths that are in tens of feet, e.g. 12.0 ft. 
for Eld Inlet. 


Table 1 

Area, Volume Table for Puget Sound 


Region 

Area MHW 

2 

n. mile 

Volume MHW 

• 1 3 
n. mile 

Mean Di 

ft. 

South Sound 

130.7 

2.49 

116 

Main Basin 

223.5 

12.1 

329 

Hood Canal 

113.2 

3.92 

210 

Whidbey Basin 

184.9 

4.58 

150 

Admiralty Inlet 

115.3 

3.41 

179 

Total Sound 

767.6 

26.5 

210 


Source--McLellan, 1954 

These values point out that for Puget Sound in general over half of the 
volume of water lies below the photic zone judged to be effective to 
about 100 ft. depth. In the main basin about 80 percent of the water 
volume is below the photic zone, whereas nearly all the water in the 


3 


shallow appended inlets may be completely within the photic zone. This 

coupled with the annual variation in solar radiation at 47° N and the in¬ 
famous cloud cover associated with our region causes seasonality in plant 
growth as well as fostering one type of marine plant life over another. 

The main deep channels have only small areas of sea floor within the 
photic zone. This coupled with minimal presence of hard stable rock sub¬ 
strates limits the overall abundance of macrophytes and rooted higher 
plants. Instead primary production on which the food webs are built is 
principally supplied by phytoplankton. In the shallow inlets both phyto¬ 
plankton and benthic plants are important if suitable substrate is 
present. 

The shallow appended inlets of Puget Sound have characteristic patterns of 
changing properties that are similar to those found in the shallow tem¬ 
perate zone estuaries of the east coast of the United States. A dissimi¬ 
larity is that many of our shallow inlets do not have extensive areas of 
adjacent low-lying land to form bordering marshlands. Further, our 
shallow inlets for the most part do not have large streams or rivers at 
their heads. This, coupled with being dead end arms of water, reduces 
the ability of these inlets to exchange water with the main body of the 
Sound and diminishes their tidal currents and turbulent mixing. 

The reduced advective and diffusive exchanges allow in situ changes in 
these appended embayments to play an important role in their observed 
changes in water properties. Large annual changes in water temperature 
are common due to surface heating and cooling, and if small streams are 
present, surface salinities can vary widely with stream flow (Fig. 2). 

Figure 2. Variation in surface salinity and temperature over the annual 
cycle of a shallow inlet station, Shelton, and a main basin station. 

Point Jefferson. 

40 


O 30 

O 

o 

>- 

5 20 


c 

00 


10 


0 

0 10 20 30 

TEMPERATURE, °C 



Jan ¥ 

Sejt 

Oft 




Jdii. ^ z 

/ 

/ 

Dec*'' , 

June 

ULla 




Jan.^' 

Fel 


-SHE 

- POI 

ETON 

NT JEFFER 

SON 








4 




















Primary production due to phytoplankton can be very high in these shallow 
embayments over the entire water column during spring and summer. This 
process can utilize nutrients faster than they can be supplied by a net 
water exchange with the main parts of the Sound. During the periods of 
high primary production the surface waters become supersaturated with dis¬ 
solved oxygen. As this production wanes due to die off and grazing, 
dissolved oxygen can decrease at depth while nutrients increase. 

The sediments in the heads of these quiet protected bays are generally 
fine and high in organic content. Other regions of these bays have mixed 
coarse to fine sediments that are representative of the adjacent land 
materials and little wave or current energy is present to erode and sort 
beach material. It is in these bays that the native shellfish are found 
and shellfish aquaculture occurs. 

Because primary production appreciably depletes soluble nutrients in these 
shallow appended embayments and natural water exchange rates are reduced, 
anthropogenic sources of nutrients can play a significant role in in¬ 
creasing primary production above normal levels to cause eutrophication. 
These inlets are poor sites for sewage treatment plant outfalls or 
drainage systems that conduct water laced with nutrients from land areas 
of intensive human use. Fortunately for Puget Sound most of these shallow 
embayments are surrounded by rural rather than urban and industrialized 
land usage. However drainage from the land, even under rural conditions, 
can supply coliform bacteria having its source in failing septic tank 
systems or hobby farms. Coliform bacteria derived from fecal matter of 
warm-blooded animals is not normally detrimental to the valuable shell¬ 
fish resources, but its presence above certain concentration levels can 
cause health risk concerns and result in the closure of shellfish beds 
to commercial and recreational harvest. 

The reduced net exchange of water between these shallow inlets and the 
main channels of the Sound not only restricts the natural supply of 
nutrients for in situ primary production, it also restricts the exporting 
of phytoplankton from the embaj^ents. This is why the shellfish have such 
a good food supply and why sediments in these bays are high in organic 
content. The sediments, being high in organic content, are often anoxic 
a few inches below their surface. Over the fall and winter period, when 
light levels and productivity are reduced and stream flow and wave 
activity increases, these inlets gradually regain reasonable levels of 
dissolved oxygen and nutrients in readiness for a new spring bloom. 

The main channels of Puget Sound function quite differently than the small 
appended embayments. In the main basin of Puget Sound the direct measure¬ 
ment of currents and their integration over tidal months as well as water 
and salt budget analysis (Cannon, 1983, Collias, 1977, Friebertshauser and 
Duxbury, 1972, and Barnes and Ebbesmeyer, 1978) indicate that a net two-layer 
estuarine circulation exists. There is a net seaward flux in the upper 
150 ft. of the water column and a landward flux between 150 ft. depth and 
the channel bottom at 600 to 800 ft. depth. It must be appreciated that 
depths of 600 ft. or greater are equivalent to the depth of the outer 


5 



edge of the continental shelf but are found in the main basin at distances 
of less than 1 mile from the beach. Measured net fluxes in the main basin 
are variable over the annual cycle. Observed values range between 

0.7 X 10® ft.^/sec. and 2.9 x 10® ft.^/sec. (Cannon, 1983) (Fig. 3). 


Figure 3. Measured fluxes in the middle of the main basin 



After Cannon and Ebbesmeyer (1978) 


The seaward surface flux should exceed the landward flux at depth by the 
freshwater inflow which has an annual average value of about 
3 3 

39 X 10 ft. /sec. The magnitude of these net fluxes can be put in per¬ 
spective by comparing them with the annual mean discharge of the Columbia 

River which is about 0.26 x 10^ ft.^/sec. (Pruter and A1verson, 1972). 

Considerable interest has been generated in the fact that a portion of the 
seaward surface layer flux is mixed with the oceanic water in the Strait 
of Juan de Fuca at the entrance sill in Admiralty Inlet. It is this 
mixture that then enters at depth to produce the landward-moving flux in 
the main basin. This process recycles some of the surface flow. Present 
estimates of the percent of recycling of surface water are between 50 to 
60 percent (Barnes and Ebbesmeyer, 1978, Cannon and Ebbesmeyer, 1978 and 
Ebbesmeyer and Barnes, 1980). The percent of recycling and rates of in¬ 
flow of mixed water are believed to be related to stability of the water 
column and spring and neap tide cycles. However a clear understanding of 
the process has not yet evolved (Geyer and Cannon, 1982). 


If 50 percent recycling of the net seaward surface flow is assumed then 
the flux of water escaping the Sound is one-hcflf the main basin surface 
flux rate. This escaping flux rate when divided into the Sound's volume 
yields a flushing time for the whole Sound of approximately 155 days. 

At the sound end of the main basin the orientation and dimensions of the 


6 



channels cause the tidal currents on the rising flood tide to prefer the 
East Channel route on their way to the Tacoma Narrows. The turbulent 
mixing in the Narrows during the flood mixes the surface water and water 
from depth in the East Channel together sending it into South Sound. On 
the ebb this well-mixed water is preferentially discharged into Colvos 
Passage which is narrow and shallow. This water exits this channel as a 
surface flow to rejoin the main basin opposite Alki Point. 

This constitutes tidal pumping that produces a net clockwise circulation 
about Vashon-Maury Islands and selectively forces deep water up from depth 
at the south end of East Channel converting it to a surface water seaward 
flow near Alki Point. Tidal pumping combined with recycling at the en¬ 
trance sill increases the two-layer net circulation in the main basin above 
what is required in and out of the Sound to maintain salt and water bud¬ 
gets. This circulation also assures that waters of the main basin in 
contact with the urban centers can move elsewhere in the Sound to exchange 
with any of the appended basins or small embayments. 

The rapid two-layer net circulation in the main basin plays a significant 
role in controlling primary production. In the spring and early summer 
the addition of snowmelt runoff and surface heating combine to produce 
stability in the top 100 ft. of the water column. This enhances bloom 
conditions for phytoplankton and dissolved oxygen levels increase as 
nutrients in the surface layer decrease. This surface layer of the main 
basin, however, is actively being advected towards the mixing sill at 
Admiralty Inlet. If 50 percent recycling occurrs, then the surface water 
with its high density of phytoplankton population, lowered nutrients and 
high oxygen values is being mixed downward and returned to the main basin. 
This distributes phytoplankton advectively to the 500 to 700 ft.-thick 
deep layer at about 1/2 the average concentration found in the TOO ft.- 
thick surface layer. This means that below the photic layer there can at 
times be about 3 times the total plant biomass found in the surface layer. 
Much of the phytoplankton is exported to the Strait. The tidal pumping 
action at the Tacoma Narrows sends the main basin deep water with its sus¬ 
pended phytoplankton and nutrients back to the surface layer and the 
photic zone. 

The strong net advective processes in the main basin, sill mixing, and 
tidal pumping, export of phytoplankton and its advection to depth, act to 
ventilate the deeper waters of the main basin and continually supply 
nutrients to the surface layer. These natural flux rates of dissolved 
oxygen and nutrients are so large that anthropogenic sources of nutrients 
and BOD in the main basin are insignificant if well dispersed. At 930 ft. 
in the main basin the percent saturation of dissolved oxygen rarely drops 
below 65 percent whereas the percent saturation at 200 - 300 ft. depth 
in the Strait and along the coast can be less than 30 percent when up- 
welled type oceanic water is present in the summertime. 

Particulates other than plankton are present in Puget Sound. They come 
from rivers, shore erosion, and urban sources. An annual average value 


7 


3 

of particulates in suspension is about 1 g/m of estuarine water. When 
this is combined with the estimate of rate of input of particulates a 
mean residence time for particulates in the water column is found to be 
about 15 days. This is about 1/10 of the estimated residence time for 
water in Puget Sound. This means that particulates are more apt to settle 
out within the system than to be exported by the net circulation fluxes. 
Thus Puget Sound is a sediment trap. 

Because many toxicants have an affinity for particulates, absorbing on 
their surface, the Sound can also be a trap or sink for toxicants. Size 
and chemical nature of the particles controls in part the scavenging of 
toxicants out of the water colutm. This and the circulation within the 
estuary determines where they eventually settle out. 

In the main basin rivers, shoreline, and urban discharges are sources for 
particulates. The pattern of their deposition is that finer and lower 
density particles in the sediments are at the greater depths along the 
central axis of the basin furthest from sources with coarser sediments 
along the edges closest to sources. A discrete source of mixed particle 
sizes or fines at the the shore edge or a wave-protected area can locally 
disrupt the general pattern. Concentrations of toxicants in the sediment 
are generally higher at depth in the fine sediments than in the coarser 
sediments of the near shore zone. If a localized source of toxicants and 
mixed-size particulates exists an elevated concentration of toxicants may 
be found in the near field of the source. If a localized source of clean 
particulates exists then their near field accumulation can reduce concen¬ 
tration levels of toxicants in the sediments (Fig* 4). 


Figure 4. Concentrations of lead in surface 
sediments are highest around Harbor Island and 
parts of the Elliott Bay waterfront, at the four 
mile rock dredge disposal site and at the site of 
the old north trunk sewer outfall between West 
Point and Shilshole Bay. 

(After Metro TPPS Study) 



8 





Some discharges are sources of toxicants only. If they are dispersed they 
tend to go far afield until particulates from other sources send them 
eventually to the sea bed. If the toxicant is not dispersed it leaves its 
signature in the near field sediments as a "hot spot." 

Toxicants attached to very fine grain or low density materials can be 
carried anywhere in the Sound by the net circulation and kept in suspen¬ 
sion by the tidal current turbulence. These materials may wander into 
the rural appended embayments far from urban sources. However, if the 
local sources of clean sediment material in these rural embayments is 
large in comparison to the advected supply, these embayments will have 
low concentrations of toxicants in the sediment. 

The laying down of toxicants in the sediments is a physical mechanism for 
cleansing the Sound. Eventually the toxicants are forced to sufficient 
depth that they no longer interact with the water or the biota. As the 
input of toxicants is decreased natural sedimentation processes will tend 
to decrease the concentration of toxicants at the sediment-water interface 
providing humans do not interfere with the sediment supply. Increasing 
the clean sediment supply increases the sedimentation rate and also de¬ 
creases the sediment toxicant levels. The depth of the Sound allows much 
of the sedimentation processes to progress with no interference to 
shipping. In the urban industrailized port areas sediment and toxicant 
accumulation may produce shoaling that requires dredging. It is in these 
areas that disturbance of the sediments makes toxicants again available to 
the water and biota. Special handling is required to minimize impacts of 
dredging and dredged material disposal. 

Puget Sound is a magnificent and dynamic estuarine environment. Annually 
it receives enough river water to form a layer 65 ft. thick over its entire 
surface. This fresh water is combined with seawater by turbulent mixing 
derived from tidal currents. The presence of this fresh water requires 
that a net circulation exists that transfers a diluted surface layer sea¬ 
ward and allows seawater in at depth to replenish the seawater carried out 
in the surface mixture. There is also the driving force of denser oceanic 
water at depth on the Strait side of the entrance sill trying to displace 
the less dense water at depth in the main basin. Both the rates of ad¬ 
dition of river water and the supply rate and density of the oceanic waters 
have seasonal cycles. The Sound continually tries to adjust its proper¬ 
ties towards an equilibrium as fresh water input and oceanic water supply 
changes in time. This makes the net circulation flows variable in time. 

In the attempt to keep up with the circulation driving forces, Puget Sound 
reaches its most diluted stage in February about one month after the maxi¬ 
mum wintertime precipitation period. At this time about 1 cubic nautical 
mile of its total of 26.5 cu. nautical miles is stored fresh water. In 
late October or early November before river flow has appreciably in¬ 
creased the Sound is at its saltiest having given up its stored fresh water 
and replaced it with the upwelled oceanic type water that entered at its 
maximum rate in August and September displacing the resident water upwards 


9 


and seaward. 


Every part of the Sound is different. One can not generalize and apply 
rules of use appropriate in the main basin to the smaller shallow appended 
embayments. Neither can one apply rules of use to the main basin that are 
derived from an understanding of the appended embayments. Although we 
should try to use a holistic approach to Puget Sound as a system, as every 
part is dependent on another part, we must also use site-specific criteria 
to determine how we should or should not capitalize on the Sound as a 
multiple resource. 


10 


References 


Barnes, Clifford A., and Ebbesmeyer, Curtis C. 1978. Some aspects of 
Puget Sound's circulation and water properties. In Estuarine 
Transport Processes , ed. B. Kjerfve, pp. 209-228. Columbia: 
University of South Carolina Press. 

Cannon, Glenn A. 1983. Contribution No. 512, Variability of circulation 
in the Puget Sound estuarine system . Seattle: Pacific Marine 
Environmental Laboratory, NOAA. 

Cannon, Glenn A., and Ebbesmeyer, Curtis C. 1978. Winter replacement 
of bottom water in Puget Sound. In Estuarine Transport Processes , 
ed. B. Kjerfve, pp. 229-238. Columbia: University of South Carolina 
Press. 

Collias, Eugene E., and Lincoln, John. 1977. A study of the nutrients in 
the main basin of Puget Sound. Puget Sound Interim Studies, 

Seattle: METRO. 

Ebbesmeyer, Curtis C., and Barnes, C. A. 1980. Control of a fjord 

basin's dynamics by tidal mixing in embracing sill zones. Estuarine 
and Coastal Marine Sciences. 11:311-330. 

Friebertshauser, Mark A., and Duxbury, Alyn C. 1972. A water budget 
study of Puget Sound and its subregions, Vol. 17, No. 2. March, 
Limnology and Oceanography 2:237-247. 

Geyer, W. R., and Cannon, G. A. 1982. Sill processes related to deep¬ 
water renewal in a fjord. Journal of Geophysical Research 87:7985- 
7996. 

McLellan, Peter M. 1954. Technical Report No. 21, An Area and Volume 

Study of Puget Sound. Seattle: University of Washington, Department 
of Oceanography. 

Pruter, A. T., and A1verson, D. L. (ed.) 1972. The Columbia River estuary 
and adjacent ocean waters: Bioenvironmental studies . Seattle: 
University of Washington Press. 


11 













»0 U>WjS_4,^5^ S\fcf ,. .ft <*»««» 

■ .■»»<* . d .K, , ,,,. 

;;ri' '■ '■■■ 


l.r4- 
'■ <. '- 

V' 





'>Sr 



. i-’.A ..4 iwr? .f«f»p*>' 
, _ Hf i«»ei" '»}5«i> to 
act'®'®*,*} ,,eAtT»W .8 


, H ^ .•^-•<. .Aiw-»K4 ^..1 *#^,3 ,rilf(a5 

• dK-’>w*iil •>'" liwti'-'’ TO.irtfiid n:vM 

' ■':>!»^ 

» to .‘cijf'31 a !■( fr -^ ,(?ain«« bn* -, .3 *f3TU3 pSrtW^'i'U 
t-.l t8tt»3 \:8 J-4’>!»'4nii)b ■" 

" 'r*'! . .:'<;’*■*«'<'<3 b» .':?; ^.w; ,^v*\u\zi-u^u$. 

.«.m 6R $ oh ,vf T<t'.' ,.;rt»f^M.jy* v-^ )SiM(ie-3»^’) to yJwJt a 


€; >: . 


. . Vir;M 

'a jh* A-jrfi .ofofoO hOR ,.» ,h .^■I'ifli 

•a ^ . U-roLt , «t -; «.««„ ,5; ^ 

' .vam t 


- r" 

!>; jwj i ^$^ i-v 


n'' ‘-‘i ^“«)8N fo/tlMatT .Wk'f ,« .nWrsJjH 

jWx^rtjh.'W ‘o yjhHwtnU :»l43»4a 3«^!t %ci yOoJZ .^■ 

.'<horf30fi*»oo ^<i 




' ^ 

!* J • ■ J I 


tft^} *J .Q biN6 ^.T 4:H 








SOURCES OF CONTAMINATION IN PUGET SOUND 


Diane E. Strayer and Spyros P. Pavlou 
Envirosphere Company 

A Division of Ebasco Services Incorporated 
Bellevue, Washington 


Introduction 


Effective management decisions concerning the control of toxic 
chemicals which enter Puget Sound require the identification of the 
contributing sources and the quantification of the total input 
associated with these sources, (i.e., the contaminant mass loading). 
Quantitative knowledge of chemical contaminant inputs into the Sound 
coupled with a good understanding of the transport and or fate of these 
materials in the receiving waters of the Sound is critical to: 1) the 
estimation of the net toxic chemical loading that remains following 
inputs, losses via sedimentation or degradation and outflows (i.e., the 
chemical mass balance); 2) the determination of the relationship 
between contaminant input, environmental distribution and effects; and 
3) establishment of a realistic control, compliance, and enforcement 
strategy. 


The total contaminant loading associated with an input source is 
calculated from the contaminant concentration in the discharge and the 
total flow or material volume of the source entering into Puget Sound. 
Although this type of calculation may appear to be straight forward, it 
is in fact quite difficult to characterize the concentration of all 
toxicants in all source discharges to Puget Sound. As an example, 
consider that there are hundreds of chemicals that could potentially be 
discharged from over 350 point sources that discharge either directly 
into Puget Sound or to rivers draining to the Sound. As discussed 
below, other sources of toxicants to Puget Sound are equally difficult 
to characterize. 

The reader is cautioned to remember that the total loadings emphasize 
the relative contribution of different input sources but do not 
indicate the potential for impacts associated with a source. In other 
words, a small loading may be associated with high concentrations that 
could cause localized impacts. Conversely, large contaminant mass 
inputs are not necessarily detrimental when they are associated with a 


13 



large material or inflow volume that has low concentrations. 

Computation of total toxicant inputs represents only the first step in 
understanding the overall significance and effect of pollution in Puget 
Sound. 


Three recently completed studies supported by EPA, the Municipality of 
Metropolitan Seattle (Metro), and NOAA in Puget Sound provide "first 
cut" estimates of mass loading for selected contaminants. These 
studies include Water Quality Management Program for Puget Sound (Jones 
and Stokes, 1983); Metals/Toxicants Pretreatment Planning Study 
(Romberg et al., 1984); and Toxic Chemicals and Biological Effects in 
Puget Sound (Quinlan et al., 1985). 


In the Jones and Stokes, 1983 report only pollutant loadings associated 
with municipal and industrial discharges were considered. The 
information reported was primarily for conventional pollutants; organic 
pollutant data was sparce. Due to these limitations, total pollutant 
loading and the relative importance of each source was not assessed in 
this report. In the TPPS report (Romberg et al., 1984), the main basin 
of Puget Sound was the primary focus of the contaminant loading 
estimates. Loading data was presented for both metals and synthetic 
organic components. 


Quinlan et al. 1985 developed contaminant loading estimates for five 
source categories and three major classes of chemical contaminants, 
including metals, polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and 
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Sources included: rivers, shoreline 
erosion, atmospheric deposition, municipal sewage effluents and 
industrial waste effluents. This report presents the most complete 
picture of contaminant inputs to Puget Sound available to date and is 
the basis of loading values that will be presented here. However, 
calculated loadings are considered only as preliminary estimates due to 
the lack of detailed concentration data available to perform the 
computations. Substantial information gaps exist for concentrations of 
metals and organic constituents in all sources discharging to Puget 
Sound. 


Although the historical data base is limited, the estimated loading for 
a number of chemical contaminants which occur in high abundance in 
Puget Sound has been quantified as a first approximation. This report 
briefly summarizes the existing information and provides an overview of 
the type of sources contributing to the contamination of the Sound, the 
quantities of contaminants emitted by these sources, and the main 
subregions of Puget Sound receiving these inputs. The main subregions 
of Puget Sound for which contaminant loadings have been calculated are 


14 


indicated on Figure 1. In addition, a summary of EPA's ongoing efforts 
to expand the database available for contaminant source 
characterization is presented. 


Sources of Toxic Chemicals 


Toxic chemicals entering Puget Sound originate from two types of 
sources: point sources and nonpoint sources. Point sources are most 
readily identified and monitored as they are associated with an outfall 
pipe. Point sources include inputs such as municipal and industrial 
outfall discharges. There are over 350 permitted discharges in the 
Puget Sound basin (USEPA, 1985). Approximately 180 discharge directly 
to the Sound with the remainder discharging to rivers that drain to the 
Sound (USEPA, 1985). Nonpoint sources are not associated with an 
outfall pipe; rather they are spread out over a large land area. These 
sources include riverine flow, urban runoff, agricultural runoff 
containing animal wastes as well as agricultural chemicals, runoff from 
logging operations, shoreline erosion, atmospheric inputs from car 
exhausts or industrial emissions (atmospheric deposition), contaminated 
groundwater entering the Sound, septic systems, sewer overflows, 
spills, and boat discharges. Point sources and some nonpoint sources 
such as runoff from dairy farms are regulated under the National 
Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit system. 


Relative Source Contributions 


Preliminary estimates of toxic chemical mass loadings have been 
computed for the following five subcategories: municipal; industrial; 
riverine; shoreline erosion; and atmospheric deposition. Loadings 
have been computed for select metals, for the polychlorinated biphenyls 
(PBCs), and for polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). The results 
of these loading computations are presented below. First, however, the 
limitations of available contaminant concentration data will be 
summarized to emphasize the preliminary nature of the computed 
contaminant loadings. Estimates of inflow and material input are 
subject to similar limitations which will not be detailed in this 
report. 


Riverine 

Available metals data were limited both in the numbers of rivers 
sampled and in the numbers of samples per river. The available data 
were used to develop single values for riverine metals concentrations. 
A crude estimate of the possible organic concentration in Puget Sound 
rivers was obtained from limited data available for the upper Duwamish 
(Green) and Puyallup Rivers and the Lake Washington Ship Canal. 


15 




FIGURE 1 

MAJOR PUGET SOUND SUBREGIONS 



16 












Shoreline Erosion 

Metals composition has been measured in very few soil samples. Data 
from three studies were used in conjunction with the reported 
composition of "average earth's crust" to determine representative 
values of Puget Sound shoreline soils. Concentrations of PAH's and 
PCB's in regional soils were assumed to be equal to zero. 


Atmospheric Inputs 

Inputs of metals and organics resulting from atmospheric transport and 
deposition have received very limited study. Lead and total suspended 
particulate data are most readily available for a number of Puget Sound 
stations. Metals data available for airborne dust collected at the 
University of Washington were also available. The ratio of lead to 
other metals in this dust was used to estimate ambient metals 
concentrations in other areas. PAH concentrations were also estimated 
from a single study and the assumption that the PAH input is 
proportional to the input of atmospheric lead. 


Municipal Discharges 

Considerably more data are available for the major municipal sewage 
effluent discharge then for other sources. However, little data exist 
for many of the smaller discharges. Therefore the concentrations of 
metals and organics reported in the Metro TPPS report were considered 
to be representative of all Puget Sound Municipal discharges. 


Industrial Discharges 

Available NPDES monitoring and inspection reports were used to estimate 
metals concentrations in industrial discharges. Available data were 
not adequate to estimate industrial inputs of organic compounds. It 
should be noted that the major contribution of metals to Puget Sound 
from industrial effluents was the ASARCO smelter near Tacoma. Which is 
now closed. Other significant industrial inputs were the pulp and 
paper mills which may have made an even greater contribution prior to 
implementation of secondary treatment facilities in the mid-1970's 
(Quinlan et al. 1985, pg. 74). 


The total Puget Sound inputs for the selected priority metals and 
synthetic organic chemicals associated with the various sources are 
presented in Tables 1 and 2. It is apparent that metal inputs are 
dominated by the major nonpoint sources (riverine and shoreline 
erosion). The large contributions of metals from shoreline erosion 
reflect the fact that the metals are natural elements present at 


17 


Table 1 

Estimated Trace Metals Inputs to Puget Sound 
(Mt/yr) 


Metal 

Source Type 


Arsenic (As) 

64 

34 

11 

1.5 

63 

Cadmium (Cd) 

19 

17 

0.5 

1.5 

2 

Chromium (Cr) 

89 

68 

ND* 

16 

18 

Copper (Cu) 

108 

75 

32 

24 

56 

Lead (Pb) 

55 

54 

121 

25 

15 

Mercury (Hg) 

4 

3 

0.1 

0.2 

0.1 

Silver (Ag) 

4 

1 

0.1 

3 

2 

Zinc (Zn) 

384 

305 

27 

51 

47 

Total 

726 

557 

192 

119 

203 


• NO = No Data 


Source: Quinlan, E.A. et al. 1985. NOAA Technical Memorandum: Toxic Chemicals and 
Biological Effects in Puget Sound: Status and Scenarios for the Future, Table 23, pg. 74. 


18 


Table 2 


Estimated Inputs for Synthetic Organic 
Compounds into Puget Sound* (Mt/yr) 




Constituent 






CPAHs 

4.8 

0 

1.77 

0.38 

NQ 

PCBs 

0.12 

0 

NQ 

0.36 

NQ 


* Advective inputs are excluded. 

NQ = Not Quantified (insufficient data!. 

Source: Quinlan, E.A. et al. 1965. NOAA Technical Memorandum: Toxic Chemicals and 
Biological Effects in Puget Sound: Status and Scenarios for the Future, Table 25, pg. 77. 


19 


background concentrations. These natural background concentrations are 
generally at low, nontoxic levels; however, low concentrations 
associated with a large material volume result in a high mass loading. 


Riverine loadings reflect natural loadings as well as loadings from 
human activities occurring upstream. The relative contribution of 
natural versus human-induced loadings is unknown at this time. As for 
shoreline erosion, contaminant concentrations in riverine inflows 
generally occur at low, non-toxic concentrations. Moderate inputs of 
metals are exhibited by atmospheric and industrial sources with 
relatively low contributions from point discharges. 


For the selected organic compounds, the total inputs are substantially 
lower than for the metals. Polynuclear aromatic (PAH) compounds appear 
to be associated with riverine and atmospheric sources, while 
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) appear to originate primarily from 
point sources. It should be noted however that the uncertainty in the 
reported numbers may be large enough that these differences are 
insignificant. Additionally, the result that high PAH loadings are 
associated with riverine and atmospheric inputs is due, in part, to the 
way that source concentrations were estimated and is probably not 
totally accurate given the lack of major known sources to most rivers 
and the fact that loadings calculated for atmospheric inputs in 
nonurban areas were also high. 


Areas of Puget Sound Receiving the Largest Input of Toxic Chemicals 

To illustrate the relative contribution of each source to the 
contaminant loading in each Puget Sound subregion, the total loading 
for six metals (arsenic, copper, lead, mercury, silver, and zinc) and 
two classes of synthetic organic compounds (combustion polynuclear 
aromatic hydrocarbons - CPAH and polychlorinated biphenyls-PCBs) 
corresponding to each source was computed as shown in Figures 2 and 3. 
It is apparent that in Whidbey Basin which receives greater material 
(water and suspended sediments) from river discharges than other 
basins, the riverine inputs dominate the remaining nonpoint source 
inputs and the point source contributions. Recall that the same 
concentrations are used to calculate riverine loadings to all basins, 
differences in total loading therefore reflect only the differences in 
river inflow volume. For the Main Basin of Puget Sound where most of 
the industrial, commercial and residential development occurs, the 
point source contributions are enhanced with respect to the nonpoint 
sources. The southern Sound and Hood Canal receive comparatively 
reduced contaminant loadings due to both the decrease in nonpoint 
source contributions and the low population density, commercialization 


20 



Total Mass Loading for Selected Metals (Mt/yr)' 


Si 


c 


§ 


S 


s 

S 

8 

S 

8 

8 

8 


% 



•*» 

$S 

o 
$ 



I*) 

« 


5 

o 


.o 

i 

<c 

I 




I 

l| 

:s-5 

I 


o 

(0 


O O 

•S'S 

k a 

C 

(B 

a 


21 
















in 


o 

oi 


ir> 


O) 

.E u) 

10 d 
(0 
O 


0) 

(0 

(0 

s 


2 


(0 

ffi 

O 

o. 

<*> „ 
S CO 

.o> O 

iCH- 


.1) 

C 

01 

■c 

§• 

o 

I 




'V.E 

a> M 
^ CO 

T3 CO 


(/) 

CQ 

u 

Q. 


(/) 

X 

< 

Q. 


E E 
o o 


c 

,o 

*♦3 

D 


C 

o 

CJ 


c 

o 

3 


C 

o 

CJ 


CO 

A 


V. > 


</) 

o 

V.* 

3 

o 

0) 
cfi-S 
c ^ 


<0 

a: 

5 


c: 

<0 


<0 

? t io 


4i 

I 

I 

«o 


to 

.5 


-‘■t 

•c: 

c: c: 
<0 o 

o 

^ c 

•a? S 

fo 

O ^ 

c ^ 

a?3 
<0 O 


;S 

]<0 

s 

<0 

'CD 

.C 


O) ^ 

c .c: 


aj 

o 

to 


CT3 vj Q 
QQw ^ 


,o 

C 

0) 

< 

o 

5 


I 


<0 

t 

c 

I 


'=1 
X o 
^ (/) 

o 

CO 


<5 

<0 

a 

/5 


to 

.c: 

o 

c 





8 


a a a 
a a a 

-1^ ^ ^ 
0> O) 05 

q> 0) 0) 

^ ^ ^ 

tn ^ »ft 


C ® 

‘C m ^ 

2 .5 ^ 
;o ^ ^ 
tt 5 5 

I ® ^ 

Ti 

to ^ 
T3 CO 

o g 

o «J 
■f O 


.CJ 

< 

o 

E 


9 

.9* 

a 

c 

•sv 

•>X 

I 


<N 


^ <0 


2 o 
t -o 
W c 

CO 

3 


22 











and industrial activity. Due to dynamic water transport through 
relatively narrow channels, shoreline erosion provides the highest 
contribution to the total metal loading in the Straight of Juan de Fuca. 


For the synthetic organic compounds, the CPAHs are the largest 
contributors to organic contaminant loading for all subregions except 
for the Main Basin where municipal inputs appear to contribute equal 
loadings of PAHs and PCBs. Again, for the northern Puget Sound 
regions, riverine inputs exceed by far any other nonpoint and and point 
source input. However, for the Main Basin, municipal discharges appear 
to be responsible for the majority of the organic contaminant loading 
(relative to nonpoint sources; recall that loadings from industrial 
sources are not well-known at this time). It is also interesting to 
note that the atmospheric contributions to the CPAH loading is 
noticeable in areas where fossil fuel consumption is increased from 
industrial and residential activity. 


Quantifying Nonpoint Source Contributions 

As pointed out earlier, nonpoint sources are diverse and difficult to 
quantify; loading estimates to date have been based upon limited data. 
Available means by which nonpoint source contributions may be more 
accurately quantified are discussed below. 


Nonpoint source inputs can be estimated in a number of ways with 
increasing levels of complexity. The simplest method is applicable in 
subregions where major nonpoint source loadings is via riverine 
inflow. In this instance, it is possible to monitor concentrations of 
contaminants in the rivers or other drainage systems and measure their 
flows. Multiplying the two together will yield the contaminant mass 
flux (loading) from this source into the Puget Sound region under 
consideration. This type of approach was used to calculate the 
nonpoint source loadings presented earlier. 


A more detailed method is to catalog contaminant sources within a given 
area and quantify concentrations and area runoff. An example of this 
method is the Water Quality Assessment (WQA) procedure developed by EPA 
as a screening tool for local authorities to assess nonpoint source 
loadings. The method is based upon the results of previous studies 
which have found correlations of contaminant loadings with various 
measurements of land use, precipitation, and other factors. The 
accuracy of estimates obtained using this procedure varies depending on 
the amount of detail with which the basin is described. 


23 



More sophisticated and potentially more accurate methods utilizing 
computer models of basin hydrology and runoff quality are also 
available. These are expensive methods that require considerable input 
data to specify the configuration of the basin being modeled as well as 
to characterize the quantity and quality of the runoff. Available 
models have different limitations and assumptions and must be 
calibrated prior to model use for predicting future conditions. During 
calibration, model coefficients are adjusted until the quantity and 
quality of runoff observed during a previous rainfall event are 
successfully calculated. 


As a test case in Puget Sound the WQA method was used to estimate 
nonpoint source inputs into two embayments: 1) Elliott Bay, receiving 
runoff from the highly urbanized Seattle and Duwamish Waterway/Kent 
Valley areas; and 2) Skagit Bay, receiving runoff from the 
predominantly rural Skagit River Valley. The loadings calculated with 
WQA were then compared to loadings computed using flow and 
concentration data to examine the applicability of the method to 
quantifying nonpoint source loading to Puget Sound embayments. 


In general, the WQA procedure greatly underestimated the quantity of 
contaminant loading into the two embayments. The reason for the 
discrepancy lies in the selection of equation coefficients for the WQA 
model. The contaminant loading estimates obtained using WQA could have 
been forced to correspond to loadings computed using flow and 
concentration data by adjusting the coefficient values used (i.e., by 
calibrating the WQA coefficients to known conditions). However, 
coefficient adjustment would not be possible for embayments where 
nonpoint source loading could not be calculated by an independent 
method; coefficients determined for one embayment would not necessarily 
apply to another. Furthermore, the need to "calibrate" the WQA 
coefficients would defeat the purpose of identifying a simple, 
generalized method for quantifying nonpoint contaminant loading. 


This simple evaluation confirmed the difficulty of quantifying, with 
accuracy, contaminant loading associated with nonpoint sources. The 
overall usefulness of the WQA model or similar screening methods lies 
in applications where it is desired to make comparisons among 
embayments as to the relative significance of nonpoint sources to 
contaminant loading or to compare the relative importance of specific 
nonpoint sources to the overall loading within a given embayment. To 
obtain accurate estimates of nonpoint source contributions to Puget 
Sound detailed monitoring studies and modelling appear to be required. 


24 


Efforts to Increase Data Availability 


To minimize ecological and public health risks from the presence of a 
variety of chemical contaminants in the receiving waters of Puget 
Sound, a realistic source control, compliance, and enforcement program 
must be implemented region wide. The initial step towards this goal 
has already been taken under the Puget Sound Initiative through the 
development of Action Plans for contaminated embayments such as 
Commencement Bay, Elliott Bay, and Everett Harbor. In these plans, 
recommendations are made for short-term and long-term actions. For 
example, in Elliott Bay suggested interim actions include source 
control and compliance inspections with additional field data 
collection requirements to support the long-term action plan design. 
These recommendations are a good first step; however, the mechanism for 
their implementation have not been designated yet. 


One of the mechanisms that can be immediately utilized to obtain more 
detailed information on the types and concentrations of contaminants 
discharged to Puget Sound is the implementation of more stringent 
monitoring requirements under the NPDES permitting process (i.e., 
requiring that samples of the discharge effluent be analyzed for all 
toxicants suspected to be preset in the discharge). The NPDES 
permitting system is described briefly below. 


NPDES permitting is conducted on a case-by-case basis. Seven broad 
classifications of discharges in Region X are designated. These 
include: coal mining; ore mining; oil and gas; seafood processing; 
municipal, pulp and paper; and aluminum. Department of Ecology 
permitting staff who specialize in these particular discharges 
determine permissible discharge concentrations and monitoring 
requirements based upon data for similar discharges, information 
supplied by the applicant, and the use and quality of the v/ater body 
receiving the discharge. Evaluation of permit compliance based on 
regularly submitted discharge monitoring reports and facility 
inspections is performed by a separate compliance division. 


Historically, only discharge flow rate, the conventional pollutants 
(e.g., nutrients and suspended solids) and metals have been monitored 
for the majority of Puget Sound dischargers. More recently, some NPDES 
permits are being written to require analyses for the priority 
pollutants suspected to be present in the discharge. EPA and 
Department of Ecology are currently reexamining the overall NPDES 
permit process with the idea of increasing monitoring requirements as 
expired permits are reissued. 


25 



In December 1986 the Puget Sound Water Quality Authority adopted tne 
first water quality management plan for Puget Sound. For point source 
pollution the plan emphasizes discharge limits, more stringent permits, 
compliance inspections, enforcement actions for nonperrnitted discharges 
and increased permit fees. For nonpoint sources the plan emphasizes 
educational programs, public involvement and legislation (e.g., to 
require marine pumpout facilities). 


It is anticipated that the availability of data required to compute 
total inputs of priority pollutants to Puget Sound will be increased in 
the future due to increased permit requirements. Additionally, permit 
requirements and other strategies are aimed at reducing contaminant 
inputs to Puget Sound. 


Summary 


As discussed, data required to compute contaminant loading to Puget 
Sound are limited. What initially appears to be a simple computation 
proves to be quite difficult because required information has not been 
routinely collected in the past. 


Available data have been used to compute preliminary contaminant mass 
loading to Puget Sound; these computations do indicate general trends 
regarding the relative contribution from different sources in the 
subregions of Puget Sound. For metals, natural contributions from 
shoreline erosion and riverine inflow appear to exceed human induced 
loading. Recall, however, that these natural inputs occur at non-toxic 
concentrations and would not be considered environmentally damaging. 
Riverine inflow of organic contaminants also appears to be significant, 
however, this conclusion is regarded cautiously due to limitations of 
the available data. Additionally, the overall contribution of human 
activities to the riverine loads is unknown. 


The large loadings associated with natural sources should not be 
misinterpreted to imply that human induced loadings are insignificant. 
Unfortunately, the data required to adequately assess the overall 
contaminant loading associated with human activities is not presently 
available. The relative importance of urban and agricultural runoff, 
logging operations, atmospheric deposition, industrial and municipal 
inputs cannot be quantified at this time. This information regarding 
human inputs is critical with respect to the protection of Puget Sound. 


To improve the accuracy and completeness of contaminant loading 
estimates better information concerning the chemical concentrations in 
both point and nonpoint sources are needed. Data are virtually 


26 



non-existence for many discharge sources. Efforts are currently 
underway to evaluate source control and compliance programs are well as 
available means to obtain improved discharge data. It is probable that 
our ability to determine contaminant loading will be improved in the 
not too distant future. 


27 


References 


Jones and Stokes Associates, Inc. 1983. Water Quality Management 
Program for Puget Sound: Part II. Prepared for: U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency Region 10. 

Quinlan, E.A., P.M. Chapman, R.N. Dexter, D.E. Konasewich, C.C. 

EObesmeyer, G.A. Erickson, B.R. Kowalski, and T.A. Silver. 1985. 
Toxic chemicals and biological effects in Puget Sound: Status and 
scenarios for the future. NOAA Tech. Memo. NOS. OMS 10. 

Romberg, G.P., S.P. Pavlou, R.F. Stokes, W. Hon, E.A. Crecelius, P. 
Hamilton, J.T. Gown, R.D. Muench, and J. Vinellio. 1984. Toxicant 
Pretreatment Planning Study Technical Report Cl: Presence, 
Distribution and Fate of Toxicants in Puget Sound and Lake 
Washington, Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, Seattle, WA. 

U.S. EPA Region 10. 1985. Puget Sound Source Ranking System Database 


28 



BIOI/DGICAL INDICATIONS OF POLLUTION IN PUGET SOUND 


Edward R. Long 

Ocean Assessments Division, NOAA 
Seattle, Washington 


Introduction 


Recent studies of pollution in Puget Sound have largely focused upon the 
identification of the kinds and amounts of certain chemicals. Many of the 
chemicals that have been found in water, sediments, or marine life are 
known to be toxic in laboratory studies. However, the toxicity of these 
chemicals in a marine environment is not always predictable. Many highly 
complex (and poorly understood) factors influence the toxicity of many 
chemicals. Therefore, the presence of a chemical or a group of chemicals, 
or even a relatively high concentration of a single chemical, does not 
necessarily ensure that the resident marine life are suffering adversity. 
Some direct evidence of biological impact is needed to answer the 
biological "So what?" question. 

In our attempts to provide answers to this question, marine scientists 
have developed a wide variety of tests to determine adverse effects. 
There is no universally accepted single test or methods, so a variety have 
been used to develop a broad base of evidence for effects. Some involve 
examining the toxicity of a sample of water or sediment from the Sound to 
marine organisms. The test is conducted in a laboratory under controlled 
conditions and is called a bioassay. Some methods involve examining 
animals living in the study area to determine if the health of individuals 
or the abundance and composition of communities of organisms is impaired 
relative to that of residents of non-contaminated areas. The results from 
both the bioassay tests and the studies of resident biota can be compared 
with the complementary chemical data and also can be compared between 
samples from contaminated areas and non-contaminated areas. 

Since it is widely known that many toxic chemicals readily attach to 
suspended particles and eventually sink, the bottom sediments become the 
final repository for much of the contamination entering the Sound. The 
animals living in or upon the sediments, then, may become exposed to 
concentrations of chemicals in the mud far in excess of those in the 
overlying water. Therefore many of the biological studies have emphasized 
testing of sediments and examination of bottom-dwelling organisms. 


29 



The concentrations of many chemicals have been determined in sediments 
from many parts of the Sound. For some chemicals the concentrations vary 
dramatically from place to place. The mixtures of chemicals also vary 
from place to place, dependent upon local sources. 

Since the sediments are a repository for many contaminants, they also can 
be regarded as a source of contaminant exposure for many biota. Comparing 
the values in figures 1 and 2, it is apparent that some contaminants 
(e.g., PCBs) may be passed from environmental media such as the sediments 
to the biota and become more concentrated from lower to higher trophic 
(feeding) levels. Other chemicals (e.g., aromatic hydrocarbons) are 
apparently metabolized successfully and do not accumulate to a significant 
degree in upper trophic level biota. 

Because of these differences in the way toxic chemicals behave, various 
biological organisms would be expected to be exposed to differing mixtures 
and concentrations of contaminants. Any single biological test of the 
effects of contaminants in the Sound may not be indicative of how other 
tests with other organisms may react. Therefore, a wide variety of tests 
have been performed by various researchers in the area. Some have shown 
trends very consistent with trends in contamination; others have not. 
Some are probably responsive to only some of the chemicals found in the 
Sound. Others may be responsive to chemicals not detected in routine 
analytical procedures. The following is a brief summary of some of the 
more important biological indications of pollution measured in Puget 
Sound. 

Overview of Biological Data 

Water bioassays. 

Oyster larvae bioassays . Table 1 summarizes the three main biological 
tests of water quality performed in the Sound. Data also exist for 
plankton community studies and effluent bioassays. 

The microscopic drifting larvae of oysters are very sensitive to 
pollutants and changes in natural water properties such as temperature. 
The larvae of the Japanese oyster were used extensively in the 1960s and 
1970s in bioassays of water samples collected near and away from the 
discharges of pulp mills. These discharges proved to be very toxic to the 
larvae, possibly explaining, in part, the demise of the native Olympic 
oyster population in Puget Sound. All the mills around Puget Sound now 
treat their effluents and have significantly decreased the total volume of 
pollutants discharged. Curiously, the oyster larvae bioassay was also 
found to be highly sensitive to a naturally occurring organism, Cerati urn . 
Cerati urn is a single-cell drifting plant that, for some reason, seems to 
kill oyster larvae. 

Up to 100% mortality among oyster larvae exposed to some samples of water 
from the south Sound inlets has been recorded as recently as 1977. 
Usually less than 5% mortality occurred in tests of samples from the 


30 







Central Basin or northern Hood Canal. The toxic samples from Budd Inlet 
near Olympia, for example, contained a lot of Ceratium . It is possible 
that the Ceratiurn "blooms" were enhanced by the abundance of organic 
material in Budd Inlet water, acting to stimulate proliferation of the 
microscopic plant. These organic materials occur in high amounts in some 
south Sound inlets both due to natural sources and man-made discharges. 


Total RGB’s 



Fat Blubber Blubber 


N=42 N=4 N=I7 

(dry wt.) (dry wt.) (wet wt.) 

EB. CB EB, CB CB. EB. PS 


N=I8 N=I2 N=4 
(wet wt.) (wet wt.) 

CB. EB. SI. PS CB. DR 


N=I7 N=2 

(wet wt.) (wet wt.) 
PS PS 


Figure 1. Total PCB concentrations (means and ranges) in surface 
sediments and selected biological tissues sampled in Elliott Bay (EB), 
Commencement Bay (CB), Puget Sound Central Basin (PS) for fish, Puget 
Sound-wide (PS) for seals, Sinclair Inlet (SI), and near the Duwamish 
River Waterway (DR). 


31 






















Herons 


N=46 N=4 N=35 N=5 N=I7 

(dry wt.) (dry wt.) (dry wt.) EB, CB PS 
EB, CB EB. CB CB 

Figure 2. Total aromatic hydrocarbon concentrations (means and ranges) in 
surface sediments and selected biological tissues sampled in Elliott Bay 
(EB), Commencement Bay (CB), and Puget Sound (PS). Data for English sole 
are for livers; those for herons are for breast fat; those for seals are 
for blubber. 


Table 1. Synopsis of water bioassays performed in Puget Sound. 


Biological Group 

Type of Measurement 

Where Observed 

Oyster larvae 

48-hour acute toxicity 
bioassay; 50% mortality 
or 50% abnormal develop¬ 
ment 

Parts of: Port Angeles, 
Port Gardner, Bellingham 
Bay 

Budd Inlet, Totten Inlet, 
Eld Inlet, 

Henderson Inlet 

Intertidal 

Bacterial contamination 

Dyes Inlet, Sinclair 

shellfish beds 

leading to decertifica¬ 
tion 

Uncertifiable due to 
proximity to point 
sources 

Inlet, Hammersley Inlet, 
Budd Inlet, east side of 
Liberty Bay, part of 

Port Susan, Burley Lagoon, 
Minter Bay 

East shore of most of 
central basin. Port 
Townsend, Eagle Harbor, 
Port Gamble, Everett 
Harbor, Bellingham Bay 

Flatfish (sole) 

Toxicity of sea surface 

Parts of Elliott Bay, 

eggs 

microlayers 

Commencement Bay, Port 
Angeles Harbor 


32 



















Bacterial contamination . Since shellfish (clams) filter huge volumes 
of water, tests of these animals can be used to imply water quality 
conditions. Intertidal shellfish beds are monitored for bacterial 
contamination. As a result of this monitoring, many parts of the Sound 
are closed to collection and marketing of clams for commercial sale. 
However, these areas are not posted as off-limits for recreational clam 
diggers. This topic is explained more thoroughly in a paper by John 
Armstrong in this volume. 

Microlayer toxicity . Many flatfish such as English sole disperse their 
eggs into the water to maximize their distribution. The eggs are very 
buoyant and float to the water's surface where they remain for up to two 
weeks. Many other species of fish and invertebrates also occur in the 
upper water column and/or at the surface during part of their development 
in the Sound. The air-sea boundary at the surface is a film called the 
microlayer. It is usually about one-half millimeter thick. Toxicants may 
concentrate there at concentrations several hundreds to two thousand-fold 
over those of the underlying water. 

Laboratory bioassays of microlayer samples from parts of Elliott and 
Commencement Bays (near Seattle and Tacoma, respectively) showed that 
some samples were very toxic (lethal) to flatfish eggs. Whereas 74 to 96 
percent of the eggs exposed to microlayer samples from a reference area 
(Sequim Bay) and the Central Basin hatched to live larvae, as few as 
none hatched following exposure to samples from parts of Elliott and 
Commencement Bays. Toxicity appears to be highest in samples taken from 
visible surface slicks contaminated with aromatic hydrocarbons and certain 
trace metals. 

Sediment bioassays. 

The five most frequently used sediment bioassays are listed in Table 2. 
Others involving use of fish larvae, sea urchin larvae, clam larvae, 
polychaetes, copepods, and shrimp have also been used. 

Oyster larvae. Recently the oyster larvae bioassay has been adapted for 
use in bioassays of sediments. As with the bioassays of water, the tests 
are performed in a laboratory with samples from the Sound. However, in 
this case the samples are of the surface sediment. In the oyster larvae 
bioassays the tests are run with the elutriates of sediment samples. 

Among the areas tested thus far, samples from parts of Bellingham Bay, 
inner Everett Harbor, the lower Duwamish Waterway, inner Sinclair Inlet, 
and the waterways of Commencement Bay have shown significant toxicity. 
Those from Samish Bay, Port Gardner, outer Elliott Bay, Port Madison and 
off the west shore of Whidbey Island were much less toxic or were not 
toxic. 

Amphipods. Small shrimp-like animals, called amphipods, have been used in 
tests of the toxicity of over 600 sediment samples from the Sound. These 
tests are performed by exposing 20 animals to bulk sediments for 10 days. 
Figure 3 illustrates the average number of survivors (out of 20) for many 


33 







Figure 3. Selected results of sediment bioassays with the amphipod, 
Rhepoxynius abronius . Average number of survivors (out of 20) after 10 
days' exposure to sediment samples from each area. 


34 










parts of the Sound. This approach demonstrates the significant 
differences in the toxicity of sediments from the urban waterways as 
compared to that of the central basin and rural bays. 

Also, samples considered to be toxic are those in which 75% or fewer of 20 
amphipods survive after ten days' exposure to the sediments. Areas in 
which a half or more of the samples were toxic are: off the Denny Way CSO 
in Elliott Bay, off the mouth of Whatcom Creek Waterway in Bellingham Bay, 
much of Sinclair Inlet, inner half of Everett Harbor, the lower Duwamish 
Waterway, Hylebos and City Waterways in Commencement Bay, a part of outer 
Quilcene Bay, much of Case Inlet, part of Eagle Harbor, off south 
Bellingham Bay and outer Dabob Bay. Areas in which less than half the 
samples were toxic include: Sequim Bay, Possession Sound, outer Elliott 
Bay (including the Four Mile Rock dump site), outer Sinclair Inlet, off 
the west shore of Whidbey Island, outer Commencement Bay, all of East 
Passage in the central basin and most of inner Bellingham Bay. 

Sediment samples that are toxic to these amphipods are often collected 
from areas that are most contaminated with toxic chemicals. However, the 
amphipods used in this bioassay are also apparently sensitive to the 
amount of organic matter and fine particles in sediments (they normally 
are found living in sandy habitats). So some of the "toxic" response 
observed in the bioassays may be due, in part, to these natural 
properties of sediments that these animals find intolerable. 


Table 2. Synopsis 

of sediment bioassays performed in Puget Sound. 

Biological Group/ 
Media Tested 

Type of Measurement 

Where Observed 

Oyster larvae/ 
elutriates 

96-h mortality 
and abnormality 

Parts of: Tacoma Waterways, 
Bellingham Bay, Everett Harbor, 
Duwamish, Sinclair Inlet 

Amphipod/bul k 
sediments 

10-d mortality 

Parts of: Tacoma Waterways, 
Elliott Bay, Bellingham Bay, 
Everett Harbor, Eagle Harbor, 
Quilcene Bay, Case Inlet 

Bacteria /n\ 

(Microtox'^M/ 

organic extracts 

5-min. EC 50 for 
reduction in bio¬ 
luminescence 

Parts of: Duwamish, Tacoma 
Waterways, Eagle Harbor 

Cultured trout 
cells/organic 
extracts 

Anaphase aberrations 
and cytotoxicity 

Parts of: Everett Harbor, 
Bellingham Bay, Elliott Bay, 
Duwamish, Tacoma Waterways, 
inner Sinclair Inlet, Birch Bay 

01 igochaete/ 
elutriates 

Altered respiration 
rate 

Parts of: Elliott Bay, Tacoma 
Waterways, Duwamish, off West 
Point 


35 









The results of the sediment bioassays with the bioluminescent bacteria, 
fish cells and oligochaetes provide subtle end points (as opposed to 
lethality). They may, in part, be responsive to chemicals that are not 
acutely toxic. The anaphase aberration test, for example, is known to be 
responsive to mutagens and promutagens in laboratory tests. These tests 
have provided results that usually corroborate the results of the acute 
toxicity bioassays; samples from the same sites were toxic to both. 
However, as would be expected, there have been differences in the results 
also. 

Biological indicators. 

Measures known to be indicative of the exposure of organisms to 
contaminants have been made with crabs, clams, fish, marine birds, and 
marine mammals captured or observed in the Sound. Some are listed in 
Table 3. 

Histopathological disorders in fish and crabs . The most widely-used 
measure has been that of histopathological disorders in bottomfish, 
especially English sole. Over 300 adult flatfish such as English sole 
from the bays and harbors of Puget Sound have been studied extensively to 
determine if they show signs of disorders possibly linked to chemical 
contaminants. Attention has been specifically focused upon disorders of 
their livers. A wide variety of disorders have been discovered and 
identified. Some occur in fish essentially everywhere and probably have 
nothing to do with pollution. Others, however, seem to only occur in 
statistically significantly higher frequencies in those portions of the 
harbors and industrial waterways that are most contaminated. 

The highest prevalences of degenerative liver lesions found in areas 
studied thus far have been in Eagle Harbor, Everett Harbor, the lower 
Duwamish Waterway, some of the waterways in Commencement Bay, and along 
the Ruston shore in Commencement Bay. Areas with none or very few fish 
with these conditions include Budd Inlet, Case Inlet, Carr Inlet, outer 
Elliott and Commencement Bays and Discovery Bay. Only one fish among 
about 900 examined from the Central Basin near Des Moines and Pt. Pulley 
had a tumor-like lesion of the liver. More specific data from these 
analyses are presented in a paper by Bruce McCain in this volume. 

The areas with highest prevalences of lesions are usually those known to 
be most contaminated with toxic chemicals. However, this co-occurrence 
does not necessarily mean the liver lesions are caused by the chemicals. 
They could be caused by or exacerbated by viruses, dietary deficiencies 
and other stress factors either exclusively or in combination. 

Crabs and shrimp from some parts of the Sound have been captured and 
examined for signs of sublethal disorders. The gills, gut, antennal gland 
at the base of the antennae, and hepatopancreas (equivalent to our livers) 
have been studied. About 40% of the crabs caught in the waterways of 
Commencement Bay had necrosis, or damage, of the hepatopancreas, as 
compared to 15% to 20% in the Duwamish Waterway and less than 10% in 


36 



Table 3. Synopsis of biological indicators of pollution measured in crabs 
and fish in Puget Sound. 


Biological Group 

Type of Measurement 

Where Observed 

Dungeness crab 

Necrosis of hepato- 
pancreas 

Parts of: Tacoma Waterways, 
Duwamish 

English sole 

High prevalences of 
liver lesions among 
adults 

Parts of: some Tacoma Waterways, 
Eagle Harbor, Everett Harbor, 
Duwamish, Elliott Bay, off the 
Ruston shore 


High concentrations 
of PAH metabolites 
in bile 

Parts of: Duwamish, Eagle 

Harbor, off Clinton, Everett 
Harbor 


High hepatic aryl 
hydrocarbon hydroxy¬ 
lase activity 

Eagle Harbor, Duwamish 


High prevalences of 
sister chromatid 
exchanges in kidney 
cells 

Duwamish 


Lower gonadosomatic 
index, lower propor¬ 
tion of females 
completing vitel¬ 
logenesis, lower 
fertilization success 
and lower percent 
viable hatch 

Eagle Harbor, Duwamish 


Elliott Bay. However, an opposite trend was observed with midgut necrosis 
in crabs: about 5% prevalence in the Commencement Bay Waterways, about 
10% in the Duwamish and nearly 20% in Elliott Bay. A very small sampling 
of crabs caught in various rural reference areas had no signs of these 
disorders. 

Fish bile analyses . Analyses of the bile of fish have been performed to 
determine the concentrations of the metabolites of polynuclear aromatic 
hydrocarbons that the fish are excreting. These metabolites are not 
accumulated in the tissues of the fish, and though they may be harmful to 
the fish, the analytical chemists normally miss them in their routine 
analyses. Another biochemical test of the exposure of fish to 


37 








hydrocarbons is that involving the analyses of liver tissue for the 
activity of detoxifying enzymes. Both of these tests have demonstrated 
that fish from Eagle Harbor and the Duwamish Waterway had been 
contaminated significantly with hydrocarbons. 

Sister chromatid exchange . A test similar to the anaphase aberration 
bioassay of sediment extracts has been used in Puget Sound with fish. 
Sister chromatid exchanges are among the types of chromosome damage that 
can be caused by mutagens. These mitotic mistakes have been observed in 
the kidney cells of English sole captured in the Duwamish Waterway at 
prevalences significantly exceeding those of fish from rural sites. 

Impaired reproductive success among fish . Recent studies have provided 
preliminary evidence that the reproductive success of some English sole in 
the Sound may be impaired by certain contaminants. This research is 
continuing. 

Health of marine birds . Studies of several species of resident marine 
birds in 1983 showed that among the many hundreds of chemicals in Puget 
Sound, only a few (notably PCB, lead, mercury) appeared in the tissues of 
marine birds. The PCB concentrations in some eggs and adults were very 
high. Studies completed in 1985 set out to determine if the birds were 
suffering any major effects. Focus was placed upon tests of reproductive 
success, histopathological disorders and changes in population size among 
Glaucous-winged Gulls, Great Blue Herons and Pigeon Guillemots. Clutch 
size and hatching success were about equal among colonies near the urban 
bays and in the remote areas. Parasitism was somewhat higher in birds 
caught near urban bays than in those from remote areas. Gulls from the 
Duwamish area appeared to have enlarged livers compared to those from 
elsewhere. The thickness of heron eggshells collected in 1984 had 
apparently decreased Sound-wide, relative to 1947 values. 

So, while some individuals may have shown some subtle signs of stress, the 
populations, overall, appeared to be doing well. Population sizes of 
resident Great Blue Herons, Glaucous-winged Gulls and Pigeon Guillemots 
appeared to be equal to or greater than those recorded historically. 
However, the possibility exists that some types of effects were occurring 
that were not measured, since most of the birds that were studied were 
outwardly apparently healthy. 

Health of marine mammals . The Strait of Juan de Fuca/Puget Sound region 
is home year-round for about 3,000 to 4,000 harbor seals and is visited 
periodically by other seals, sea lions, porpoises, killer whales, minke 
whales, and other whales. Since the harbor seals live in the Sound 
year-round, they have been studied most intensively. As was observed in 
marine birds, these seals seem to concentrate very few chemicals in their 
tissues relative to the variety found in the Sound. Concentrations of 
PCBs in most seals are comparable to those encountered by scientists at 
many places throughout the world. However, some animals collected in 
the mid-1970s had relatively high PCB concentrations in their blubber. 
Studies conducted in 1984 showed that seals from Gertrude Island (south 


38 






of Tacoma) had equal or higher population growth rates and birth rates, 
fewer premature births, and roughly equal neonatal deaths of pups as 
compared to their neighbors on the remote Smith and Protection Islands 
(reference areas) in the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Ten newly-born pups 
found dead at Smith Island had discolored or atrophied livers, whereas 
only two with these conditions were found elsewhere. Some dead pups at 
Smith Island had symptons of an influenza viral infection. There were no 
signs of severe degenerative tumors or similar internal disorders among 
animals examined from South Sound. However, more adult seals had skin 
lesions near their umbilicus at Gertrude Island than at Smith Island. The 
significance of these latter findings is not known, but it appears the 
population is generally doing well. 


Table 4. Synopsis of Biological Indicators of pollution measured in 
marine birds and mammals in Puget Sound. 


Biological Group 

Type of Measurement 

Where Observed 

Glaucous-winged 

gulls 

High liver:body 
weight ratios 

Colonies near the Duwamish 

Great blue herons 

Diminished eggshell 
thickness relative 
to 1947 

Samish Island, March Point, 
near the Duwamish, Nisqually 
Delta 

Harbor seals 

Premature births, 
influenza virus, 
discolored or 
atrophied livers 
among pups 

Smith Island 
(reference area) 


Population changes. 

Changes in the size of populations of various biota have been monitored 
through surveys in the field, analyses of catches and examination of 
harvest (landings) records. Populations sizes can be controlled by many 
powerful nature factors and, in the case of commercially important 
species, by market conditions and regulations. Nevertheless, the ultimate 
test of the health of a population of organisms is that of its size. Data 
for many species, especially those that are harvested, are available. 
Synopses for one harvested and four non-harvested species are listed in 
Table 5. 

Oysters. The Olympia oyster which was harvested in great numbers (up to 
1.6 mTTlion pounds in 1914) in the Sound is now grown in only two areas 
(Little Skookum and Totten Inlets). Less than 100,000 pounds per year are 


39 









harvested now. The considerable decrease was attributed to the discharges 
from pulp mills along with severe winter weather in the early 1900s. The 
population is now making a gradual recovery. 


Table 5. Synopsis 

of selected population changes in Puget Sound biota. 

Biological Group 

Type of Measurement 

Where Observed 

Olympia (native) 
oysters 

Harvests reduced from 1.6 
million Ib./yr. in 1914 to 
about 100,000 Ib./yr in 

1984 

Historically near pulp 
mill discharges 

Glaucous-winged 

gulls 

Numbers of nesting pairs 
increased 25x to 600x in 
past 40 years vs. 4x at 

Smith Island in past 20 

Elliott Bay, Commence¬ 
ment Bay colonies 


years 


Harbor seals 

Population near Tacoma 
increased from 150 in 

1965 to 500 in 1984 

Gertrude Island 

Harbor porpoise 

Population has disappeared 

Sound-wide 

Killer whale 
(Orca) 

Reduced birth rate, high 
percent mortality, high 
percent population change 
(decrease) relative to 
other pods 

Transient southern pod 
that frequents Puget 

Sound 


Gulls . The populations of gulls in the Sound have increased dramatically, 
probably in response to the availability of refuse near the urban areas. 
Populations of many other marine bird species have fluctuated with varying 
patterns; none showing signs of any dramatic decreases. 

Harbor seals . The size of the harbor seal and sea lion populations have 
increased rapidly over the past 20 years. Estimates of the harbor seal 
population at an important haul-out site, Gertrude Island, near Tacoma, 
reflect this overall trend of increasing numbers of pinnipeds in the Sound 
(Figure 4). The recent rate of increase at Gertrude Island exceeds the 
biological reproductive capacity of the population there, indicating that 
recruitment through emigration has occurred. 

Harbor porpoise . The population of harbor porpoise that historically 
frequented the Sound has disappeared. This species is intolerant of 
disturbance and probably now avoids the urbanized areas of the Central 
Basin. 


40 













Figure 4. High counts of total harbor seals and pups at Gertrude Island 
in southern Puget Sound. 


Killer whales, gray whales . The size of the pods of killer whales (Orca ) 
that visit the Sound most frequently has been increasing over the past 
10-15 years, while the membership in the transient pods that visit the 
region more infrequently has decreased. The size of the gray whale 
population that passes by the state on its way between Mexico and Alaska 
has steadily increased since federal protection was implemented. Some 
dead juvenile whales have been found in the Sound each year for at least 
the past four years. These deaths are to be expected with an estimated 
annual rate of calf mortality of 25% among a total population of roughly 
17,000 individuals. 

Community changes. 

Most community-level ecological research in the Sound has been directed to 
the benthos, those organisms that live in or on the bottom. Three major 
topical areas have been studied (Table 6). 

Soft-bottom benthos. The structure of soft-bottom benthic communities 
has been assessed in many studies involving several thousand samples. No 
thorough (statistical) synthesis of all these data has been performed and 


41 









published thus far. Analyses of some of the data have shown that the 
benthos in some of the urban bays and waterways are severely impacted. 
These measures are listed in Table 6. Descriptive and qualitative 
observations made in the 1950s indicated that many parts of the urban bays 
such as Everett Harbor and the Tacoma Waterways were abiotic. Abiotic 
bottom samples are very rarely encountered in the 1980s. The benthos of 
much of the Central Basin appears to be rich in species, high in biomass 
and populated with species indicative of a health environment. Spatial 
and temporal trends in the benthos may be influenced by depth, sediment 
texture, salinity, and food availability as well as by sources of 
pollutants. 

Table 6. Synopsis of community changes measured in Puget Sound. 


Biological Group 

Types of Measurements 

Where Observed 

Soft-bottom 

benthos 

Reduced species diversity 
and richness, structural 
changes 

Tacoma Waterways, 

Everett Harbor, Eagle 
Harbor, Duwamish, inner 
Elliott Harbor 

Epibenthos 

Reduced 6-month recruit¬ 
ment on standard-sized 
artificial surfaces 

Tacoma Waterways, lower 
Duwamish 

Selected marine 
algae 

Reduced species richness 
and growth rates 

Near sewage treatment 
plants 

Epibenthic recruitment. Successional patterns 

and species richness in 


epibenthic assemblages colonizing artificial substrates indicate that 
conditions in the Duwamish and Commencement Bay Waterways are 
significantly different from those of outer Elliott Bay (Seacrest) and 
relatively rural areas (Port Washington Narrows, Manchester). Figure 5 
demonstrates the number of species colonizing these suspended substrates 
after 6 months exposure in seven areas. Though the salinity was similar 
at all sites, the freshwater flow in the Duwamish may have been partly 
responsible for the low number of species observed there. The numbers of 
species in the Commencement Bay Waterway sites were lower than those found 
in the other (reference) areas. 

Marine algae . Marine algal species comprise a very important component of 
intertidal and subtidal communities in the Sound. They provide food and 
shelter directly to certain animals. They provide detritus for many food 
webs that support important fish and invertebrates. Some of the large 
kelps are harvested and consumed by people. Some species are very 
sensitive to changes in wave exposure, water clarity, and concentrations 
of toxicants in the water. Alterations in the algal components of 
epibenthic communities thought to not be related to natural factors have 
been observed near the sewage treatment plants in the Sound. 


42 














Reference Commencement Elliott 

areas Bay Bay 


Figure 5. Numbers of species that colonized 20.3 cm x 20.3 cm horizontal 
substrates over 6-month periods at seven sites in Puget Sound. 


Summary 

The concentrations of toxic chemicals are clearly most elevated in the 
sediments of parts of the industrial harbors and waterways near urban 
centers of the region. Measures of biological stress usually indicate the 
biota are most affected in these same areas. There are many signs of 
subtle sublethal effects, e.g., the liver lesions in flatfish, and the 
enlarged livers among gulls. 


43 






















There are relatively fewer signs of lethal conditions. Massive fish kills 
are relatively infrequent as compared to conditions in the 1950s. Few 
sediment samples from a few small areas have no marine life in them, 
whereas in the 1950s major parts of some harbors had no life at all. 
Lethal conditions are mainly observed in bioassays performed with water, 
sediment and microlayer samples. These tests are often positive (toxic) 
in samples from the contaminated harbors and waterways and usually not 
toxic in samples from rural areas or the main basin of the Sound. 
Finally, the effects observed thus far are mainly restricted to those 
among invertebrates and fish. Recent studies have shown that no major 
adverse effects apparently are occurring among the resident marine birds 
and mammals, though more research should be performed to determine if some 
subtle changes are occurring. 

A very important byproduct of the assessment of the environmental quality 
of the Sound has been the development and refinement of assessment 
methods. Many of these methods have involved biological tests performed 
synoptically with chemical analyses. Some methods initially used in Puget 
Sound studies are now being performed elsewhere, significantly, in the 
National Status and Trends Program. Chemical analyses of sediments and 
bottomfish, histopathological analyses of internal organs of bottomfish 
and bile metabolite analyses of bottomfish are being performed at over 50 
sites along the Pacific, Atlantic, and Gulf coasts. 

In addition, the Sediment Quality Triad (Long and Chapman, 1986) was 
developed in studies performed in Puget Sound. The Triad consists of 
measures of sediment contamination, toxicity and infaunal community 
structure. It has been and is being used to develop strong evidence of 
the relative degrees of pollution of sediments. 

While marine scientists have made great gains in our knowledge of the 
biological effects of pollution in Puget Sound, large gaps in our data 
still exist. First, the geographic extent of the observed effects is not 
fully documented. Most of the large bays and harbors that would likely be 
contaminated, and therefore demonstrate adverse effects, have been studied 
to some degree. Many other small bays and much of the open waters of 
Puget Sound basin have yet to be tested fully. Knowledge of the geo¬ 
graphic extent of problem areas is needed so remedial actions can be 
focused upon those portions of the region that most need help. A few 
studies are either underway or recently completed to fill in some of these 
gaps. More are being planned. 

Second, there is precious little information on how the conditions of the 
Sound are changing with time. Are environmental conditions getting better 
or worse? The urgency to take action now in areas that are getting worse 
exceeds that for areas that are getting better due to existing clean-up 
efforts. Plans for coordinating and augmenting existing monitoring 
programs are being formulated. 


44 


Finally, we have very little information as to which chemicals or groups 
of chemicals are causing the observed effects. More and more circum¬ 
stantial evidence suggests the aromatic hydrocarbons are involved with 
some types of effects. Without firm knowledge however, the regulatory 
agencies must make educated guesses concerning which chemicals are the 
"bad actors" that must be removed from the Sound. 

References 


Long, E. R. and R. M Chapman. 1986. A sediment quality triad: Measures 
of sediment contamination, toxicity, and infaunal community 
composition in Puget Sound. Mar. Pollu. Bull. 16(10):405-415. 


45 



I- , 


g ' *,?)' ,>■—1» 

^ ^ ‘f •» #* ( v:* ’ 3 I 


i 

I 

^•t 

■''Ui’'. r.^ ■ •■“■ y‘fi4'.' «<wwf* dm .\ir I ^ 

V‘ .. ? • ■tv'-' ^n'.'* i'':ii< Z i't 't'I Jf ^1*. liiai *D 

-jfr- t ir-w I I '■ ' ,... ■ ..•• 

- .%’^.v*,r‘-' vf ;tw‘ t f.;, ,• -.1-* t'ts 0 r'v. 

‘l> '■-< M- inn^l f-.^■^ t'O-Pi^ 

i --(u ■ Lr.\ , • rjKf'f “h: =]■»■■ ‘r -f* »'J'* 



• f 

\ -' 

. . i‘. ‘■■'•Ml'. . i 


■' i*' ' . ’ 

1®^ ■ ^ •*''' t '' 

>t»lf .M.r ,,:H,. 


-1 


* .:m: 


t ' I ’ 

■I ^ ' 
.■» -t i 


'i0 

> ‘‘ i Ji -4 P’^Oi 

.'■ 'T', ’ ■ fi ’■ 1 

rt/' fit, i « - K>. 



'^rP9 





BACTERIAL CONTAMINATION OF SHELLFISH IN PUGET SOUND, WASHINGTON 
A GROWING CONCERN 


John W. Armstrong 

Environmental Protection Agency-Region 10 
Seattle, Washington 

and 

Daniel P. Cheney 
Bay Center Mariculture 
Bay Center, Washington 


Overview 


During the 1940's, the late Seattle restaurateur Ivar Haglund 
popularized the "Ballad of the Early Settler," a tale of a pioneer who 
failed to find his fortune In the Alaska gold rush, and returned to the 
waters of Puget Sound In western Washington to live a happy life 
surrounded by "acres of clams." Indeed clams, oysters and other 
shellfish have long been favorite food for the Inhabitants of Puget Sound 
because they were free for the taking. Long before European explorers 
sailed Into the Inland waters of Puget Sound, coastal Indian tribes 
gathered and used Its abundant shellfish resources for food and trade. 
Early western Washington settlers had a maxim about the bounty to be 
found In the local tidelands-"When the tide Is out, the table Is set." 
Shellfish were widespread throughout the Sound, were accessible, and were 
considered public property. Anyone within reach of the Sound's beaches 
could dig a bucketful of clams or a bushel of oysters In short order on a 
low tide and provide fresh seafood at suppertime. 


Today, Puget Sound continues to support a rich and varied assemblage 
of economically Important marine shellfish, many of which, such as the 
Olympia oyster Qstrea lurlda , are native species. To be able to maintain 
those aquatic species, and to harvest them without undue 
restrictions,remain as key elements In the public's perception of the 
quality of life In our region. Therefore, maintenance of the quality of 
the Puget Sound environment Is closely linked to the social and cultural 
values which are attached to shellfish resources. 


Environmental quality In Puget Sound Is, In many respects, much 
better than In other estuaries In the United States. However, shellfish 
harvests from a number of the Sound's most productive waters are being 
banned, restricted, or threatened because of high levels of bacteria (and 
potentially pathogens), coming from sewage treatment plants. Improperly 
placed or failed septic tank systems, recreational boats and other 


47 





vessels, hobby farms, and stormwater runoff. Toxic wastes have also been 
implicated in declines and contamination of shellfish stocks. Paralytic 
shellfish poisoning (PSP) also remains as a significant water quality 
factor affecting shellfish in Puget Sound. In the discussion that 
follows, we will review the extent, impact and treatment of each of these 
problems in greater detail, but we'll focus on bacterial contamination. 


Shellfish-Distribution, Fisheries and Farming 


This paper began with a brief look at the past. The present 
production of bivalve molluscs includes the aquaculture of oysters, clams 
and mussels, and the capture fishery for clams. Several other 
shellfish, such as scallops, make up a minor part of the present 
harvests. In addition, there are many bivalve clams not taken in the 
commercial or recreational fisheries, such as the tiny but abundant 
Macoma balthica , which are eaten by valuable fish and bird species. 

Puget Sound bivalve shellfish are harvested from intertidal to shallow 
subtidal (i.e., less than 20 meters) depths throughout Puget Sound 
(Figure 1). 


The production and harvest of shellfish in Puget Sound is carried 
out on both public and private lands. While all subtidal lands and 
overlying waters are managed and controlled by state or federal agencies, 
much of the tidelands are under private ownership. This is a result of 
legislation passed in the late 1800's to encourage the development of an 
oyster industry. The development of new culture and harvest methods and 
improved management have opened up additional areas and resources in 
Puget Sound. For example, in the subtidal areas, geoduck clams ( Panope 
qenerosa ) weighing up to 20 pounds each, are now hand-harvested by divers 
and subtidal hardshell clams are obtained using mechanical hydraulic 
harvesting machines. Soft-shelled clams ( Mya arenaria ) are suffiently 
abundant in the intertidal areas of some embayments to warrant harvest. 

In addition, new advancements in artifically seeding oyster and clam beds 
have allowed an increase and stability in yields beyond what is possible 
with recruitment from natural setting. Both the capture fishery, or 
wildstock harvest of shellfish, and aquaculture or aquatic farming, have 
benefitted from these changes. 


The farm production of oysters in Puget Sound has not varied greatly 
since the 1950's, and now accounts for about 50% of the total state 
production. The total production of Pacific oysters in Puget Sound is 3 
million pounds of oyster meats, or about 6% of the total U.S oyster 
production. Most oysters are farmed on tidelands in the highly 
productive small bays and inlets of south Puget Sound. 


48 









Figure 1. Distribution of shellfish landings in Puget Sound, 1978-82. 
Each circle depicts average annual landings from the value given up to 
the next highest value. 


49 











The intertidal culture of clams is also carried out by farmers who 
own the beds or lease tidelands from the state. Most of the farms are 
small, not exceeding 50,000 pounds per year—with a total annual harvest 
of 2 to 3 million pounds. Individuals or families with beachfront 
property may supply commercial farms with clams on a part-time basis, 
especially in the summer. 


Puget Sound supports substantial subtidal clam fisheries. All 
harvesting operations occur on leased lands managed and controlled by the 
state. The geoduck clam fishery, which began in the 1970's, accounts for 
the majority of the present 5 million pound per year harvest. 


Finally, within the last 10 years, the raft culture of blue mussels 
( Myti1 us edul i s ) in subtidal and intertidal waters by farmers in central 
Puget Sound has begun to make a small but growing contribution to the 
state shellfish production. 


Types and Sources of Contamination 


Shellfish that strain the seawater for all or a portion of their 
food, such as clams, oysters, and mussels are very efficient feeders, and 
can readily remove from the water small particles, such as bacteria (or 
bacteria-laden silts). When bacteria, or particles containing toxic 
chemicals, are ingested by the shellfish, the edible shellfish meats 
become contaminated. Numerous areas throughout Puget Sound have been 
closed to commercial shellfishing (Table 1 and Figure 2), with the vast 
majority of these closures being related to bacterial contamination. 


Bacteria 


Water that has been polluted by human sewage is hazardous because 
several diseases are transmitted through human wastes, such as typhoid, 
cholera, dysentary and hepatitus. Usually, disease causing viruses are 
not measured directly in the water. Instead, the numbers of indicator 
bacteria, i.e., total coliform, fecal coliform, and fecal streptococci, 
are measured. These bacteria are known as indicator organisms because 
they are supposed to indicate the presence of sewage and ideally are 
correlated with the number of pathogens in a water sample. All 
commercial shellfish growning areas are monitored for these indicator 
organisms by the Washington Department of Social and Health Services 
(DSHS). 


50 








TABLE 1. 


Areas within Puget Sound where the commercial harvest of 
shellfish has been closed or restricted due to bacterial 
contamination. 


Date 

Location 

Cause 

Decertified^ 

1950s 

Dyes Inlet-all 

Bremerton STP* 

1950s 

Sinclair Inlet-all 

Bremerton STP 

1950s** 

Oakland Bay/Hammersly Inlet- 
in the vicinity of Shelton 

Shelton STP, 
Mill 

1950s 

Budd Inlet 

STP, Deschutes 
Ri ver 

1960s 

Liberty Bay-east side, near 

Poulsbo 

Poulsbo STP, 
Marina 

1968 

Port Susan-about 1/3 
of the tideflats 
near the Sti1laguamish 

River 

Dairy runoff 
into the 

Sti11aguamish 
River, STPs 

1981 

Burley Lagoon-al1 

Nonpoint 
sources 

1982 

Minter Bay-all 

Nonpoint 
sources 

1985 

Quilcene Bay around 

streams at the head 
of the bay 

Nonpoint 
sources 

1985 

Henderson Inlet-lower 
quarter of Inlet 

Nonpoint 
sources 


51 



Table I (continued) 


Date Location Cause 

Conditionally Approved 

1982 Eld Inlet-lower quarter of Nonpoint 

inlet sources 

1983 Penn Cove-portion of north STP, or 

shore nonpoint 

sources 


Uncertifiable*** 


Eastern shore of Puget Sound 

STPs, 

from Tacoma to Edmonds 

industrial 


outfal1s 

Hartstene Island, northern tip 

STP 

Port Townsend 

STP 

Winslow 

STP 

Appletree Cove, near Kingston 

Sewage outfall 

Port Gamble 

Sewage outfal1 

Everett 

STP, 


i ndustry. 


nonpoint 

sources 


Bel 1ingham Bay 

STP, mills. 


nonpoint 


sources 


52 




Table I (continued) 


1 / These classifications are described later in this paper under the 
existing shellfish protection program of the Washington Department of 
Social and Health Services (DSHS). 


* Sewage Treatment Plant 

** Decertified area reduced in 1980 due to installation of secondary 
treatment 

*** Based on review of geoduck beds for lease suitability by the 
Washington Department of Fisheries and DSHS. 

Sources: Department of Ecology, 1984, "Shellfish Protection Strategy," 
and personal communication with DSHS staff. 


53 



Figure 2. Locations of areas within Puget Sound where commercial 
shellfish harvest has been closed or restricted due to bacterial 
contamination. These areas are commonly associated with urban centers, 
marinas, and sewage outfalls. 


54 











Sewage treatment plant (STP) outfalls and the encroachment of large 
scale development upstream of shellfish beds have, historically, been 
major factors responsible for the closure of shellfish growing and 
harvest areas. Any time a STP is constructed with a marine outfall, all 
waters inside a circle having a radius of one-half mile from the outfall 
point are closed to commercial harvest of shellfish by the DSHS. The 
closed area may be larger for particularly large outfalls or vary in 
shape when water current studies indicate sewage movement along shore. 


In addition to point sources (i.e. STPs and combined sewer 
overflows) of bacterial inputs to Puget Sound, recent water quality 
surveys indicate that nonpoint source contamination is also an important 
contributing factor. All storm runoff contains a variety of bacteria and 
other substances that can be carried to the shellfish via streams and 
overland flow. Wastes from failing septic systems, dairy farms and 
"hobby" farms are key sources in more rural areas. In a study that was 
completed in 1982 on New York's Long Island Sound,the predominant cause 
for the withholding of certification for about 25% of the shellfish beds 
was the result of coliform bacteria discharged to the bays by urban 
stormwater runoff. In some areas, the level of indicator organisms can 
be high at all times, even when there may be no obvious source of 
bacteria. Unfortunately, there is no clear answer to the question of 
health risk of these ubiquitous bacteria in stormwater. Closures of 
areas due to nonpoint source contamination does not necessarily mean the 
shellfish are unfit for human assumption; but it does prohibit commercial 
harvest and sales. 


In Puget Sound, urban growth and the resultant discharges from 
sewage treatment plants have historically had the most significant impact 
on oyster culture. As was discussed above, shellfish growing areas are 
carefully monitored to ensure oysters are grown in the highest quality 
waters. Grounds are usually closed to commercial harvest near marinas, 
heavily used boat- traffic areas, sewage discharges, and urban areas—and 
increased development near oyster growing areas places an economic 
hardship on the oyster growers. Fortunately the most intense 
urbanization of Puget Sound developed apart from the richest culture 
areas, thus allowing some of this traditional industry to escape most of 
the pollution problems. Still, as is shown in Table 1, large areas of 
valuable intertidal lands are now closed to harvest. 


The pattern of the most recent closures strongly suggest that 
contamination from overland and stormwater runoff in lightly to 
moderately developed areas is now the most serious threat to the areas 
used for the culture of oysters and other shellfish. For example, 
located on the fringes of the cities of Tacoma and Olympia in Central and 
South Puget Sound, are four important oyster growning areas-Minter Bay, 
Burley Lagoon, and Henderson and Eld Inlets-that have been decertified or 


55 


conditionally approved for commercial harvest. These are relatively 
rural areas that have recently undergone considerable development, 
Induced, In part, by the move to a more charming and less urbanized 
"rural" lifestyle. This Increased human Influx has resulted In greater 
use of onsite waste disposal (I.e. septic tanks, often In poor soils). 
Increased small scale animal keeping (or "hobby farming"). Increased 
development near shorelines and creeks, and more household pets - all 
potential sources of bacteria which may reach Puget Sound. 


The problems of stormwater runoff must not be regarded lightly, 
because of the potential for wide-scale contamination and the closure of 
oyster and other shellfish growing areas In Puget Sound. This has been 
clearly Illustrated In a 1984 study conducted by Thurston County In 
Southern Puget Sound. Particular emphasis in this study was placed on 
sampling the streams and tributary waters and stormwater drainages to 
Henderson and Eld Inlets. Samples taken at various locations In a stream 
draining a large Henderson Inlet storm sewer system exhibited a 
significant Increase In Indicator bacteria occurring downstream from the 
storm sewer outfall. The storm sewer drained land subjected to diverse 
uses ranging from low density residential to Industrial. Smaller 
culverts, retention ponds, and roadways draining Into streams that were 
tributary to Important oyster beds In Henderson Inlet also had very high 
Indicator bacteria levels. Creeks and culverts In the more rural Eld 
Inlet watershed receive drainage from forested areas, pasture lands, low 
density residential areas and roadways. Fecal conform levels In most of 
the creeks were low to moderate. However,a few of the streams, culverts 
and drainage ditches In areas with numerous "hobby farms" had bacteria 
levels as high as those recorded on the more populated areas of Henderson 
Inlet. 


The numerous and diffuse nature of these so-called "nonpoint" 
sources makes them very difficult to control; therefore, a considerable 
amount of time and effort must be expended to understand and resolve the 
problem. It takes the cooperation of landowners and a long-term 
committment by local, state and federal jurisdictions. There Is no easy 
and set way to reduce the collform bacteria In runoff. Rather a 
combination of methods must be employed. These Include storage of runoff 
In ponds, providing areas where the water can Infiltrate or seep back 
Into the ground, and various Institutional measures such as animal 
control ordinances, stream corridor preservation and various development 
ordinances. 


The success of these measures In Puget Sound still remains to be 
assessed. For example, an extensive cleanup of nonpoint sources of 
contamination was made last year In the drainages surrounding the 
productive, but closed, oyster beds of Burley Lagoon and Minter Bay. 
However, a recent water quality and shellfish survey by the DSHS was 


56 


unable to detect a measurable decline in the collform levels at any 
location In the two bays. Because the cleanup effort was Intended to be 
a model for nonpoint source control efforts In Puget Sound, the lack of 
Improvement Is of great concern. Additional sampling will be carried out 
through the winter and summer of 1987. 


Closures of commercial shellfish beds prohibit the sale of oysters, 
clams and others bivalve crops from those areas. However, the producer 
may be able to "relay" or "depurate" his harvest. Relaying—the transfer 
of contaminated shellfish to certified waters—Is practiced by at least 
one oyster farmer In Puget Sound. Depuration—the on-site clearance of 
bacteria In a closed purified sea water system—Is presently not allowed 
In the state; however. It Is a common practice In several East Coast 
states. Relaying Is feasible only If the producers have access to 
certified grounds. It Is an expensive process, not entirely acceptable 
In today's fastidious market where product quality Is a foremost 
consideration. Therefore, resolution of bacterial contamination sources, 
rather than relying on product treatment, offers the greatest level of 
product quality, consumer acceptance, and economic return. 


Paralytic shellfish poisoning (PSP) 


For many years. It was known that humans could suffer poisoning (and 
In some cases die) when they had eaten clams, mussels and other bivalve 
shellfish. It was not until the late 1920's that what Is now termed 
"paralytic shellfish poisoning" was determined to be caused by large, 
seasonal concentrations of a toxic, free-swimming, marine d1noflagel1 ate 
called Gonyaulax catenella , which when Ingested by filter-feeding 
molluscs, resulted In accumulation of toxins In the body of the shellfish. 


Until 1978 PSP contamination was confined largely to sporadic 
outbreaks In the Strait of Juan de Fuca, and although Gonyaulax catenella 
was present In Puget Sound, It did not often occur In numbers sufficient 
to produce toxicity from shellfish consumption. However, In 1978 there 
was a major outbreak of PSP affecting shellfish as far south as central 
Puget Sound. Blue mussels and butter clams ( Saxidomus qlqanteus ) were 
the most severely affected, and most Intertidal commercial and sport clam 
digging was banned for several months. Since 1978, annual outbreaks 
("blooms") of varying severity of Gonyaulax have resulted In restrictions 
on the harvest of clams, mussels, and other shellfish at numerous 
locations In north and central Puget Sound. Although these restrictions 
have not had a major Impact on the commercial harvests, there Is concern 
that PSP could spread to the numerous commercial growing areas of south 
Puget Sound. The cause of the outbreaks Is unknown, and there Is no 
evidence, as yet, to link them to any man-induced factor. 


57 









Toxic chemicals 


Numerous toxic chemicals occur in the sediments and marine organisms 
in Puget Sound. These toxic chemicals come from diverse sources such as: 
point and nonpoint discharges, storm runoff, accidental spills and 
atmospheric deposition. The results of recent studies indicate that 
several of these chemicals occur in Puget Sound shellfish, although the 
available information on bivalves is very limited. Essentially all 
surveys of toxic chemicals in bivalve shellfish tissues from the Sound 
indicate that tissue chemical levels are below the few chemical specific 
action levels established by the Food and Drug Administration. However, 
most chemicals detected in the tissues have never been assigned action 
levels. EPA is presently attempting to determine the health risks 
associated with consuming small quantities of toxic chemicals over long 
periods of time. These "chemical specific" risk assessments should help 
put the health concerns associated with these various chemicals in better 
perspective in the near future. 


Existing Shellfish Protection Programs 


Several federal and state agencies, as well as local health 
departments, play major roles in managing and protecting the shellfish 
resources of Puget Sound. The roles these governmental agencies 
presentiv play in managing shellfish are briefly described below. 


Washington Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) 


The goal of the DSHS shellfish program is to prevent shellfish-borne 
disease outbreaks. While discussions here deal mainly with bacterial or 
viral disease outbreaks, DSHS also has a successful program of guarding 
the shellfish consumer from health problems associated with paralytic 
shellfish poisoning (PSP). 


DSHS samples commercial shellfish beds to ensure that fecal coliform 
bacteria levels are at or below established maximum permissible levels. 
The fecal coliform bacteria, while not harmful themselves, are indicators 
that are associated with viral and bacterial pathogens that can cause 
infectious illnesses. The Washington State regulations addressing fecal 
coliform bacteria reflect, as do those of most other states, the National 


58 




Shellfish Sanitation Program Guidelines issued in 1965 and revised in 
1986. The maximum permissable fecal coliform bacteria levels are: 

1. 230 organisms per 100 g of shellfish tissue, and 

2. A median of 14 organisms per 100 ml, with not more than 10 
percent of the samples exceeding 43 per 100 ml, in the water. 


The DSHS sampling of commercial shellfish beds has been done in 
accordance with the National Shellfish Sanitation Program Guidelines. 

This sampling has been fairly infrequent and irregular in its coverage of 
shellfish growing areas. However, these guidelines have recently been 
revised and will require at least yearly sampling in "approved" areas 
(approved for commercial harvest, bacterial standards are met) and 
monthly sampling in "conditionally approved" areas (areas which are 
impacted by predictable pollution events such as sewage treatment plant 
failure or rainfall of a certain magnitude). Additional DSHS 
classifications for shellfish growing areas include "decertified" (areas 
that have once been approved for production and subsequently found to be 
contaminated) and "uncertifiable" (where commercial production has not 
previously occurred, but where certification would not be feasible due to 
the existence of numerous sources of pollution). DSHS does no routine 
monitoring, classifying, or posting of recreational shellfishing areas. 


DSHS (with funding from Region 10 of the Environmental Protection 
Agency) is presently sampling and evaluating bacterial and toxic chemical 
contamination of clams at 25 recreational beaches throughout Puget 
Sound. This one-year study will be completed in 1987 and is the most 
extensive recreational shellfish survey ever initiated in Puget Sound. 


The DSHS shellfish program also includes patrolling areas which are 
closed to commercial shellfishing, conducting marketplace bacterial 
surveys, and managing a PSP monitoring program. As part of the PSP 
monitoring program, local health jurisdictions collect samples from 
recreational beaches, and the commercial shellfish industry is required 
to submit samples from commercial growing areas. DSHS conducts the PSP 
tests for all samples which are submitted by the county health 
departments and the shellfish industry. 


Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) 


Ecology, as the state water quality agency, has 
to maintain and/or restore adequate water quality to 


the responsibi1ity 
protect shellfish 


59 


beds. Adequate water quality may be maintained through the following 
Ecology programs: 

(1) Water Quality Standards - maximum permissible standards 
for conform and other variables have been established for all 
waters, 

(2) NPDES permits - effluent standards are established for 
point discharges, and shellfish resources are considered as 
proposed discharges are evaluated. In addition. Ecology 
conducts a number of intensive surveys each year to determine 
the effect of discharges on the receiving waters and to 
investigate other priority or emergency water quality problems, 
and 

(3) Shellfish protection grants are available to counties and 
other local governments to identify and correct water quality 
problems. 


Washington Department of Fisheries (WDF) 


WDF has the responsibility for managing shellfish resources in Puget 
Sound to assure a sustainable resource for future generations. WDF does 
very little monitoring to determine either the condition or abundance of 
bivalves on Puget Sound beaches, and does no routine bacterial or toxics 
monitoring. 


Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) 


DNR leases and manages state-owned land for commercial shellfishing 
and various types of aquaculture. DNR does no routine bacterial or 
toxics monitoring of the shellfish. 


Local governments 


Local governments (generally counties) are responsible for sampling 
recreational shellfish beaches for bacterial and PSP contamination and 
closing these beaches if a health hazard is found. To date, the counties 
appear to be sampling their beaches adequately for PSP contamination, but 
sampling for bacterial contamination, with a few exceptions, has been 
very infrequent due to staff/resources limitations. 


60 


Local governments also play a key role in controlling nonpoint 
source pollution. Some of these nonpoint sources of bacterial 
contamination include onsite septic systems, stormwater, marinas, animal 
keeping practices, and various other land use activities. 


U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 


FDA provides technical shellfish protection assistance to the 
state. This includes consultation and technical assistance, an annual 
review of the state's shellfish program, training on shellfish-related 
issues and occasional help with shellfish sample collection. FDA also 
publishes monthly a list of all certified shellfish dealers (those whose 
growing areas and facilities meet bacterial standards and who are 
authorized to make interstate shipments) in the country. In addition, 
FDA occasionally samples commercial growing areas for toxic chemicals 
and/or fecal coliform bacteria. 


National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 


As part of its Status and Trends Program, NOAA has initiated the 
sampling of toxic chemicals in blue mussels ( Myti1 us edulis ) from seven 
locations in Puget Sound. 


U.S. Coast Guard 


The Coast Guard is responsible for regulating the discharge of 
sewage from boats. However, due to limited staff, there are essentially 
no Coast Guard checks of Puget Sound boaters to ensure that boats are 
equipped with approved marine sanitations devices. 


Proposed Changes in Existing Shellfish Programs 


The Puget Sound Water Quality Authority (PSWQA), a recently formed 
(1985) Washington State agency, adopted a water quality management plan 
for the Sound in December, 1986, which will change the way several state 
agencies are carrying out their water quality and shellfish 
responsibilities. The PSWQA plan, goals, and agency program changes 
which involve shellfish, are discussed below. 


61 





The Puget Sound plan and goals regarding shellfish are very broad. 
These goals include protecting shellfish consumers from pathogens and 
other contaminants, including toxicants, maintaining and enhancing 
shellfish abundance, reopening closed/correctable* commercial shellfish 
beds and controlling sources of pollution to prevent additional closures 
of commercial and recreational beds. 


The plan affects mainly the DSHS, Ecology and local governments. It 
calls for greater coordination and planning among these and other 
agencies regarding shellfish resources and for reducing nonpoint source 
pollution. Ecology will continue to provide grants to local 
governmentsfor commercial shellfish protection as part of the nonpoint 
program, and DSHS will dramatically increase its commercial shellfish bed 
fecal coliform bacteria sampling program. In addition, DSHS will 
establish an ongoing program, based on the recent EPA-DSHS one-year 
study, to test for toxicants at both commercial and recreational beds. 
Beds which exceed FDA or other regionally accepted toxics action levels 
will be closed and re-evaluated. Additionally, DSHS, Ecology, and other 
state and local agencies will jointly develop a program to protect 
recreational shellfish beds from pollution. This program includes 
testing the clams and water for fecal coliform bacteria and closing and 
posting areas which do not meet commercial bed standards. These agencies 
will also initiate restoration and protection projects in contaminated or 
threatened areas. 


The PSWQA plan's nonpoint program is closely linked to its shellfish 
program and includes as its goal the reopening of certain commercial 
shellfish beds. This is to be achieved by local governments, with 
oversight by Ecology and the PSWQA, developing watershed action plans for 
controlling nonpoint source pollution. The local governments are 
responsible for addressing septic systems, animal keeping and pasture 
management practices as well as stormwater and other locally important 
nonpoint sources. These plans may seek voluntary or mandatory (depending 
on the preferences of the local government) compliance with programs to 
reduce nonpoint pollution to Puget Sound. Ecology and the PSWQA will 
audit these action plans every two years for the effectiveness of their 
nonpoint source reduction programs. If some of these programs are not 
effective in reducing nonpoint pollution, the PSWQA may include 


*Closed/correctable beds are those growing areas where Ecology has 
determined that improvements are possible; the term is applied to areas 
that are not intensively developed, do not have major or numerous sewage 
discharges, and where application of Ecology's shellfish protection 
program could lead to reopening beds. 


62 



prescriptive standards to control nonpoint sources in its 1989 Puget 
Sound Water Quality Management Plan. 


Finally, the Puget Sound plan requires the Washington State 
Department of Parks and Recreation to obtain a Memorandum of 
Understanding with the U.S. Coast Guard to permit state inspection of 
recreational vessels and other uninspected vessels under 65 feet in 
length for approved marine sanitation devices and to develop an 
inspection program, coordinated with a boaters' education program, 
focused on protecting shallow bays and other sensitive areas. 


Conclusion 


The capture fisherman and aquatic farmer are both dependent on clean 
water, providing economic incentives to preserve and improve water 
quality. Aquatic farmering is also uniquely dependent on the proper 
maintenance and enforcement of regional water quality standards. 

Problems caused by contamination of shellfish beds all too often can be 
traced to non-enforcement of existing laws, lax or improper application 
of existing land use codes, little or no inspection of on-site septic 
system, and a lack of proper disinfection at sewage treatment plants. 


Bacterial contamination is severely limiting our use of the bivalve 
shellfish resource in Puget Sound. Large areas are closed to commercial 
harvest and an adequate bacterial and toxicant monitoring program would 
undoubtably close numerous recreational shellfish beds (and perhaps 
additional commercial beds as well). Some microbiologists believe that 
viral and bacterial diseases from the waters or shellfish of Puget Sound 
are rare only because there is relatively little swimming in Puget Sound 
and because few shellfish species from the Sound are consumed without 
cooking. 


The PSWQA plan calls for major changes in sampling for bacteria and 
toxicants in shellfish from commercial and recreational harvest areas in 
the Sound. In addition, local and state governmental agencies have been 
asked to address and solve the nonpoint pollution problems which bring 
bacteria and toxics to the shellfish harvest areas. At this time, it's 
been left to the local governments to seek voluntary or mandatory 
compliance with issues like: insuring septic tanks are functioning 
properly, keeping farm animal wastes out of streams, reducing stormwater 
runoff, and reducing bacterial contamination from boats in marinas. 


If the local governments are not progressing satisfactorily in 
reducing the nonpoint sources of pollution between 1987 and 1989, the 


63 



PSWQA has the option of requiring mandatory changes in the land use 
activities which are affecting Puget Sound shellfish. Will the local 
governments' propose voluntary or mandatory means to reducing the 
bacterial and viral pathogen loading to Puget Sound? And will these 
means work? And finally, will the state legislature provide the money 
required for the proposed monitoring and grant programs? These and other 
important issues concerning the future of recreational and commercial 
shellfish harvesting and Puget Sound water quality will be determined in 
the next few years, beginning with the level of funding that the 1987 
session of Washington State legislature is willing to provide for plan 
implementation. 


Acknowledgements 


In preparing this paper the authors have borrowed heavily from 
Shellfish and Seaweed Harvest of Puget Sound by Daniel P. Cheney and 
Thomas F. Mumford, Jr., Washington Sea Grant Program, University of 
Washington (1986); 1987 Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan by the 
Puget Sound Water Quality (1987); and the Shellfish Protection Strategy 
by Robert S. Saunders, Washington State Department of Ecology (1984). In 
addition, the authors wish to thank Jack Lilja, Naki Stevens, Ruth 
Taggart, Yvette Mercer, Nellie Johnson, Karen Hoover, and Carol Mochizuki 
for their comments and assistance. 


64 






PUGET SOUND SEDIMENTS: 

A SOURCE AND SINK OF CONTMINANTS 


Robert C. Barrick 
Tetra Tech Inc. 
Bellevue, Washington 


Introduction 


Why be concerned with Puget Sound sediments? In general, they are 
some of the cleanest sediments found in estuaries of the east and west 
coasts of the United States. Nevertheless, highly contaminated sediments 
are found in some parts of Puget Sound, including the most toxic marine 
sediment ever tested (Swartz et al., in preparation). Concern over the 
potential biological effects of these sediments has prompted extensive 
studies by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency (NOAA), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Washington Department of Ecology, 
the University of Washington (UW), the Municipality of Metropolitan 
Seattle (Metro), and other agencies. The wide concentration range and 
diversity in contamination has made Puget Sound especially useful for 
studying biological effects of sediment contamination. 

Puget Sound sediments are a sink for contaminants from three major 
kinds of sources: direct discharges from human activities, natural 
discharges, and relocation of contaminated sediments. Much of the 
contamination derives from people, as either industrial or municipal 
discharges. Natural contaminants eroded from geologic material within the 
drainage basin enter Puget Sound through river discharges. These 
contaminants include organic compounds [e.g., polynuclear aromatic 
hydrocarbons (PAH)] from coal deposits (Barrick et al. 1984; Furlong and 
Carpenter 1982) and metals from a variety of source rocks. Dredged 
material relocated to open-water disposal sites is yet another source of 
contaminants to Puget Sound. Fourteen active and inactive disposal sites 
have been located throughout Puget Sound (Figure 1). Three major sites 
are located next to the cities of Tacoma, Seattle, and Everett. 

Contamination and potential biological effects at these disposal 
sites are not well characterized but will receive additional attention 
through the Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis (PSDDA) program 
administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE), U.S. EPA, 
Washington Department of Ecology, and Washington Department of Natural 
Resources. The current policy for these sites is to not permit disposal 


65 



>► 



BELLINGHAM 


VICTORIA 


PORT ANGELES 


BREMERTON 


TACOMA 


OLYMPIA 


EVERETT 


SITES CURRENTLY USED 
HISTORICAL SITES 


10 


20 


miles 


Figure 1. Location of dredged material disposal sites in Puget Sound. 


66 







of material more contaminated than that already on site. Proposed 
guidelines under PSDDA will require disposal decisions to be based on 
biological as well as chemical test results. 

Contaminants of Concern in Puget Sound Sediments 

Of the thousands of chemicals known or suspected to exist in the 
environment, only a small number have been measured routinely in detailed 
environmental studies. Chemicals that are considered a threat to the 
environmental health of Puget Sound (and other coastal areas across the 
country) share some common characteristics: 

t A demonstrated or suspected effect on human health or 

marine life 

t An identified past or present source of sufficient 

magnitude to be of concern 

t Potential persistence as a toxic contaminant 


t A potential for entering the food web. 

Several hundred chemicals have been tentatively identified in 
selected samples of Puget Sound sediments. Routine analyses have been 
conducted for only about 150 toxic chemicals and in only some areas of the 
Sound. Chemicals that have been frequently detected are limited to 
phenols, PAH, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), other chlorinated 
hydrocarbons, some pesticides (e.g., DDT), and most metals. Lists of 
contaminants of concern has been developed by several agencies. A recent 
summary of contaminants of concern and their general properties has been 
published by the Puget Sound Estuary Program (Tetra Tech 1986a). 

Some of these chemicals are no longer actively produced (e.g., PCBs 
and DDT), but still enter Puget Sound from dumps, spills, and other waste 
sources. The sources of many toxic chemicals are difficult to distinguish 
or are widespread. For example, PAH come from the burning of wood, coal, 
and oil products; from leaking automobile oils and eroded highway 
pavement; and from a number of industrial processes including steel 
production and wood preserving. Other toxic chemicals have both human and 
natural sources. ' For example, arsenic comes from copper smelting 
operations and from ocean water, which contains naturally elevated levels 
of dissolved arsenic. 

Contaminant Accumulation and Burial 


Many factors influence contaminant dispersal and accumulation in 
Puget Sound. The manner in which a pollutant is dispersed from its point 
of introduction into the marine environment will be largely determined by 
its chemical properties, particularly its affinity for particles. The 
mobility, fate, and ecological impact of a chemical contaminant will be 


67 




determined by 1) the kind of source producing the contaminant, 2) the 
magnitude of the source discharge over time, 3) chemical phase 
transformation or alteration near the point of discharge, 4) dispersal 
mechanisms, and 5) post-depositional changes. Chemical properties of the 
contaminants and the processes listed above establish a link between 
pollutant sources and the sediments where pollutants accumulate. 

Most contaminants of concern bind to particles that become sediments 
at the bottom of Puget Sound. This removal process is an important means 
of immobilizing and eventually burying contaminants under layers of newer 
deposits. The general process of sedimentation is illustrated in 
Figure 2. Contaminated material from a source discharge mixes with 
material from other sources in the water column and is either degraded, 
transported away, or accumulated in surface sediments. 

Two major factors that determine the length of time contaminants will 
remain in surface sediments include the sedimentation rate (how fast new 
sediment accumulates) and the thickness of the mixed layer of surface 
sediments. Contaminants are quickly buried when there is a fast 
sedimentation rate and a thin surface mixed layer. Alternatively, 
contaminants can persist for years in surface sediments when there is a 
slow sedimentation rate and a thick mixed layer. Mixing results from 
biological activities (e.g., burrowing of benthic organisms and bottom 
fish) and physical processes (e.g., resuspension of sediments by storms 
and currents). When freshly deposited material is mixed extensively with 
older deposits, surface sediment concentrations will not quickly reflect 
changes in the discharge of contaminants from sources. 

Most marine sediments accumulate slowly. Sediment accumulation in 
Puget Sound (excluding major river deltas and other sites off major 
discharges of solids) typically ranges from 0.1 to 3 cm/yr in surface 
sediments (Carpenter et al. 1985). The sedimentation rates are determined 
using radionuclide techniques and are also expressed as the total mass of 
sediment accumulation per unit area (0.26 to 1.2 gm*cm~2.yr“l). The 
average mixed layer depth in Puget Sound sediments based on these 
techniques is approximately 10 cm, but ranges from 0 to 40 cm (Carpenter 
et al. 1985; Lavelle et al. 1986). Residence time calculations based on 
radionuclide techniques indicate that contaminants may be retained in the 
biologically active surface sediments for years or decades. 

After a source has been controlled (Figure 2) several years may pass 
before contaminants from the source are buried below the surface mixed 
layer. Even so, maintenance or remedial dredging can expose contaminated 
sediments that have been deeply buried. 

Toxic Effects in Sediments 


Because sediments are a major sink of contaminants discharged to the 
environment, they are also a major source of toxic chemicals to organisms 
exposed to the sediments. Laboratory and field evidence from Puget Sound 
suggests that adverse biological effects may be associated with high 


68 



OTHER 

SOURCES 


WATER 


y^WW'W^WW 

.\NN\\\\\\\N\\ 
»N\S\\\ \ N^Ps * 


DISCHARGE 


O 


0 \\\N\\\\\\N\' 

\S\\\\NN\SN\\ 
S\\N\N\\ \ \ S \ \ 

\N' \ \N\\\N SW\ \ \ \ 

• •V»v f ^ f // / f f f / 

Y/i NNN\NN\N\\\NS 
W / y y^ • # y y y y y y^ 



5 YEARS 


1 DISCHARGE 
ACTIVE 




Figure 2. Schematic of sediment accumulation and mixing over time at a 
site before and after source control of a contaminated discharge. 


69 























concentrations of certain contaminants in surface sediments. These 
biological problems can result from both historical and ongoing sources. 
Study of the geographic extent of biological problems produced by the 
present levels of toxic chemicals is still underway. 

A number of tests have been used to assess adverse biological effects 
associated with sediment contamination in Puget Sound (Figure 3). 
Laboratory tests include acute lethal and sublethal bioassays to measure 
sediment toxicity (e.g., Rhepoxinius abronius amphipod mortality and 
oyster larvae abnormality). Direct field measurements include the numbers 
and kinds of organisms living in the sediments (infauna), levels of 
chemicals in fish and other organisms (bioaccumulation), and the 
prevalence of abnormalities (lesions) in fish livers. 

Definitive cause-effect data relating the individual and collective 
effects of chemicals to a wide range of biological effects are largely 
unavailable. As an interim measure, sediment criteria based on empirical 
associations between sediment chemistry and biological conditions of 
sediments were developed in Puget Sound for PSDDA, the Puget Sound Estuary 
Program (PSEP), and the Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tideflats Superfund 
Investigation (Tetra Tech 1985, 1986b). Matched chemical and biological 
data collected for the same sediment samples (or strictly comparable 
samples) are now available for 200 sampling stations in Puget Sound. 
Although not all biological indicators were measured for every sample, 
this data set covers 11 different urban and nonurban areas of Puget Sound 
(Figure 4). Additional theoretical and empirical studies have been 
conducted for U.S. EPA at the national level (Battelle 1986) and applied 
to Puget Sound (Tetra Tech 1986b). 

In a recent comparison of four independent field and laboratory 
approaches to relating bulk sediment chemistry to biological effects 
(Chapman et al. 1987), sediment criteria for three common contaminants 
yielded comparable values ranging from (dry weight sediment): lead, 
50-300 ppm; PAH, 2-12 ppm; PCB 0.06-0.13 ppm. These values include 
concentrations at or below which biological effects have been shown to be 
minimal and the lowest concentrations at which biological effects have 
been shown to occur. Data used in each approach derived either 
exclusively or in part from Puget Sound. 

Identification of contaminated sediments that produce adverse 
biological effects is only one step in the process of solving 
environmental problems. Recent efforts in Puget Sound have begun to focus 
on eliminating problem sediments through a combination of source control 
and sediment remedial action. A kinetic model is being developed to 
assess the proper mix of source control and oftentimes expensive sediment 
remedial action. This model predicts decreases in surface sediment 
concentrations over time associated with different source control actions. 
The model also considers sediment mixing and the residence time of 
contaminants in the biologically active surface sediments. Hence, the 
model can be used to predict what actions are necessary to obtain 


70 





ICHEMISTRYl 


IbioassaysI 



BIOACCUMULATION LIVER LESIONS 


Figure 3. Examples of Indicators used to evaluate the extent of problems 
from toxic chemicals In Puget Sound. 


71 






















Figure 4. Locations of stations included in the 200-station Puget Sound 
sediment quality database. 


72 

























acceptable sediment concentrations (i.e., concentrations that are not 
expected to produce biological effects) within a reasonable time frame. 

Distribution of Chemicals in Puget Sound Sediments 

A general overview of the distribution of contaminated areas in Puget 
Sound is provided in Figure 5. With the exception of metals, 
hydrocarbons, and PCBs, few other contaminants have been measured in 
sediments from all regions of Puget Sound. Three general levels of 
contamination are shown in the figure: 1) areas where high contamination 
by one or more chemicals appears to be associated with biological effects, 
2) "clean" areas where contamination appears to be too low to cause 
effects (and in fact effects are minimal in the few areas tested), and 3) 
areas where the potential effects of intermediate levels of contamination 
are uncertain. As noted, this distribution gives only a rough guide to 
the potential environmental effects that may accompany the contamination. 

Mean and maximum concentrations of some common chemicals of concern 
are shown in Figure 6 for areas ranging from high to low contamination. 
Levels of contamination observed in different regions of the Sound 
correspond strongly with the level of development nearby. For example, 
the heavily industrialized areas of Seattle (e.g., the West Waterway of 
the Duwamish River) and Tacoma (e.g., Hylebos Waterway) are among the most 
contaminated and contain a complex mixture of toxic substances. The 
Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline near Tacoma contains high levels of certain 
metals associated with a smelting operation on the shoreline. 

Other contaminated areas, such as Eagle Harbor west of Seattle at 
Winslow, are grossly contaminated in small areas with only a limited 
number of related substances (i.e., hydrocarbons likely derived from 
creosote). The harbors at Everett and Bremerton receive wastes from major 
pulp and paper mill and naval ship repair operations, respectively. These 
harbors are areas of high contamination, and will be more completely 
characterized in studies to be completed by PSEP in 1987 and 1988. Some 
areas of concern in the past are now less contaminated. For example, high 
mercury contamination observed in Bellingham Bay during the late 1960s has 
lessened after the source was shut down and contaminated sediments were 
buried by cleaner material. 

The pattern of contamination in Puget Sound demonstrates that, with 
the exception of spills and intentional dumping at dredged-material 
disposal sites, distance from source discharges is the major factor in 
determining the levels of contaminants in Puget Sound sediments. Areas 
that have intermediate levels of contamination (e.g.. Central Puget Sound 
between Seattle and Tacoma; Figure 6) are predominantly influenced by 
water currents that transport contaminants from areas with major sources. 
Areas with low contaminant levels (e.g., bays used as reference areas; 
Figure 6) are generally far from major development. Even in these areas, 
natural transport by air and water has introduced contaminants. Probably 
no area of the Sound is free from some contamination by toxic chemicals. 


73 




Figure 5. General distribution of toxic chemical contamination in the 
surface sediments of Puget Sound. 


74 

















SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION IN PUGET SOUND 


WEST 

WATERmV 

100,000 —I 
50,000 — 





Figure 6. Comparisons of the concentrations of selected toxic chemicals in 
the surface sediments from representative areas of Puget Sound. 


75 
































Contaminant problems in industrialized embayments of Puget Sound are 
diverse both in terms of concentration and chemical composition. This 
diversity can be revealed in the visual appearance of sediments. For 
example, sediment cores collected in many urban embayments of Puget Sound 
are anoxic, greenish black muds with a thin layer of brown oxidized 
sediment at the surface. In contrast, sediment collected near a major 
outfall of a now-closed copper smelter on the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shore¬ 
line of Tacoma consists of bands of richly colored sediment that derive 
from high concentrations (>10,000 ppm) of several metals. A completely 
different sediment can be collected in Eagle Harbor (Figure 4), where an 
accidental spill or intentional dumping of creosote has created 
pitch-black sediments that ooze brown oil. These latter sediments caused 
100 percent mortality in a range of laboratory bioassays (Tetra Tech 1986c 
and references therein) and required dilution to 0.6 percent of the 
original material in clean sediment before insignificant toxicity was 
observed (Swartz et al. in preparation). PAH concentrations in subsurface 
sediment from this area exceeded 2,000 ppm (Tetra Tech 1986c). 

In addition to diversity in chemical composition, highly contaminated 
sediments in Puget Sound industrialized embayments often occur in patches 
near point sources. For example, contaminated problem areas in 
Commencement Bay that exhibited biological effects are shown in Figure 7. 
High concentrations of PAH (>20 ppm) were found close to the head of 
Hylebos Waterway in Tacoma’s Commencement Bay (Figure 7) near a ditch that 
discharges waste from an aluminum plant. At the mouth of the same 
waterway near a chemical manufacturing plant, several chlorinated 
compounds including chlorinated butadienes (industrial by-products) were 
found at well over 1,000 times reference conditions. Other chemicals 
measured at over 1,000 times reference conditions were alkylated phenols 
in sediments adjacent to the main outfall of a major pulp and paper mill 
in St. Paul Waterway, and four metals (antimony, arsenic, copper, and 
mercury) in sediments adjacent to the main outfalls of the copper smelter 
described earlier on the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline. The most extreme 
biological effects were found at these same sites in St. Paul Waterway and 
on the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline. 

A patchy distribution of contamination is characteristic of all of 
the industrialized embayments, including Elliott Bay off Seattle 
(Figure 8). In Elliott Bay, patches of high contamination along the 
Duwamish Waterway contrast with large areas of lower contamination in the 
outer bay. An area of intermediate contamination is found in the outer 
bay around the Four-Mile Rock dredged material disposal site (Figure 8). 

Historical Trends 


By using chemical dating methods and measuring the contaminant 
concentrations in different sediment layers, the history of contamination 
can be evaluated. Detailed historical sediment data exist for only some 
contaminants in Puget Sound, including PAH, PCBs, and most metals. 
Concentrations of nearly all contaminants measured in this fashion are low 
in sediments that were deposited in Puget Sound before about 1880. The 


76 




COMMENCEMENT 

BAY 


HIGHEST PRIORITY PROBLEM AREAS 

SECOND PRIORITY PROBLEM AREAS 

POTENTIAL PROBLEM AREAS 
(NO CONFIRMING BIOLOGICAL 
DATA AVAILABLE) 

POTENTIAL PROBLEM AREA BY 
HISTORICAL DATA ONLY 

CHEMICALS EXCEED APPARENT 
EFFECTS THRESHOLD 

CHEMICALS BELOW APPARENT 
EFFECTS THRESHOLD 


0 * 4000 

I_I_I_I_I FEET 

I I 'I METERS 

0 1000 


COMMENCEMENT 

BAY 


Figure 7. 


TACOMA 


HIGHEST PRIORITY PROBLEM AREAS 
SECOND PRIORITY PROBLEM AREAS 


_ POTENTIAL PROBLEM AREAS 

(NO CONFIRMING BIOLOGICAL 
'********' DATA AVAILABLE) 

POTENTIAL PROBLEM AREA BY 
HISTORICAL DATA ONLY 

• CHEMICALS EXCEED APPARENT 

EFFECTS THRESHOLD 

O CHEMICALS BELOW APPARENT 

EFFECTS THRESHOLD 


Location and relative priority of problem areas 
identified in Commencement Bay waterways and 
the Ruston-R. Defiance Shoreline. 


RUSTON 


Mcti 


4000 


I Mrrcna 


1000 


77 














































Figure 8. Location and initial relative priority of problem areas Identified in 
Elliott Bay. 


78 


















































late 1800s correspond to the beginning of major urban development of the 
region. For PAH, which have natural sources (e.g., forest fires and 
erosion of coal deposits), a significant increase in concentration was 
observed in sediments dating from the turn of the century. In central 
Puget Sound, maximum concentrations of PAH appear to have occurred 
sometime around the 1950s (Figure 9). These PAH concentrations are 
approximately 2-3 times present day concentrations and over 30 times those 
of the 1880s. Much greater temporal changes are apparent close to PAH 
sources in the industrialized embayments and Eagle Harbor. Decreases 
observed in some areas since the late 1950s probably result from 
improvements in industrial practices and perhaps from the continued 
conversion from coal to oil used for home heating (Bates et al. 1984; 
Barrick and Prahl in press). 

PCBs were used commercially only from the 1930s to the 1970s when 
their use was banned. PCB concentrations in sediments show a 
corresponding pattern (Figure 9). Several metals (e.g., lead, copper, and 
zinc) show increased concentrations over the last century, but again have 
somewhat lower concentrations in recently deposited sediments (Figure 9). 

Conclusions 


Accurate measurements of many toxic chemicals concentrations in the 
environment have been made only in the last several years. Consequently, 
it is difficult to assess the spatial and temporal trends in the 
concentrations of all but a few toxic chemicals. For some chemicals found 
frequently in Puget Sound (e.g., PAH, PCBs, and lead), several lines of 
evidence demonstrate decreasing discharges and sediment concentrations in 
recent years. Improved pollution controls, changes in product usage, and 
the closure of some industries are thought to result in similar reductions 
for other chemicals. Additional data on sources and sediment 
concentrations are required to support this conclusion. Recent increases 
in concentrations may result from discharges associated with new 
industries and more domestic sewage. In general, however, contamination 
by many chemicals was much worse 10-25 years ago. 

Puget Sound as a whole is not highly contaminated in comparison with 
other coastal areas of the United States. Some small areas of the Sound 
are contaminated at levels similar to heavily contaminated areas along the 
East coast and southern California. For particular chemicals, it has been 
possible to identify sediment concentrations at which biological effects 
can be observed. This knowledge of the apparent association of chemical 
contamination and biological effects, although still limited, contributes 
to a growing body of information useful in addressing environmental 
problems in all contaminated coastal areas. These problems arise because 
sediments act not only as a convenient and significant sink for 
contaminants, but also as a source of toxics to organisms that live in or 
feed on surface sediments. 


79 



250 H 



I I I I I I I 
1860 1880 1900 1920 1930 1940 1960 1980 


TOTAL PCBs 



COMBUSTION PAH 



1860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 


LEAD 


Figure 9. History of sediment contamination by PCBs, PAH, and lead In 
central Puget Sound from 1860 to 1980. 


80 









REFERENCES 


Barrick, R.C., E.T. Furlong, and R. Carpenter. 1984. Hydrocarbon and 
azaarene markers of coal transport to aquatic sediments. Environ. Sci. 
Technol. 18:846-854. 

Barrick, R.C., and F.G. Prahl. In press. Hydrocarbon geochemistry of the 
Puget Sound Region. III. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in sediments. 
Estuar. Coastal Shelf Sci. 

Bates, T.S., S.E. Hamilton, and J.D. Cline. 1984. Vertical transport and 
sedimentation of hydrocarbons in the central basin of Puget Sound, 
Washington. Environ. Sci. Technol. 18:299-305. 

Battelle. 1986. Sediment quality criteria methodology validation: 
calculation of screening level concentrations from field data. Final 
Report. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Criteria 
and Standards Division. Battelle, Washington, DC. 60 pp. + appendices. 

210 

Carpenter, R., M.L. Peterson, and J.T. Bennett. 1985. Pb-derived 
sediment accumulation and mixing rates for the greater Puget Sound region. 
Mar. Geol. 64:291-312. 

Chapman, P.M., R.C. Barrick, J.M. Neff, and R.C. Swartz. In press. Four 
independent approaches to developing sediment quality criteria yield 
similar values for model contaminants. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 

Furlong, E.T., and R. Carpenter. 1982. Azaarenes in Puget Sound 
sediments. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta. 46:1385-1396. 

Lavelle, J.W., G.J. Massoth, and E.A. Crecelius. 1986. Accumulation 
rates of recent sediments in Puget Sound, Washington. Mar. Geol. 72:59- 
70. 


Swartz, R.C., P.F. Kemp, D.W. Schults, G.R. Ditsworth, and R.J. Ozretich. 
In preparation. Toxicity of sediment from Eagle Harbor, Washington to the 
infaunal amphipod, Rhepoxynius abronius . 

Tetra Tech. 1985. Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tidef1ats remedial 
investigation. Volumes 1 and 2. Final Report. Prepared for Washington 
Department of Ecology and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Tetra 
Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA. 

Tetra Tech. 1986a. User’s manual for the pollutant of concern matrix. 
Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region X, Office of 
Puget Sound. Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA. 64 pp. + appendices. 


81 




Tetra Tech. 1986b. Development of sediment quality values for Puget 
Sound. Vol 1. Final Report. Prepared for Resource Planning Associates, 
for the Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis and Puget Sound Estuary 
Program. Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA. 129 pp. 

Tetra Tech. 1986c. Eagle Harbor preliminary investigation. Final 
Report. Prepared for Black & Veatch, Engineers-Architests under contract 
with Washington Department of Ecology. Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA. 
92 pp. + appendices. 


82 


TOXIC CHEMICALS IN FISH: 
REPRODUCTION 


EFFECTS ON THEIR HEALTH AND 


McCain, Sin—Lam Chan, Usha Varanasi 
Margaret M. Krahn, and Donald W. Brown 
Northwest and Alaska Fisheries Center 
Seattle, Washington 


Introduction 


A number of studies conducted during the past decade in Puget Sound have 
demonstrated the presence of chemically contaminated sediments and bottcm- 
fish particularly in certain urban/industrial embayments. A variety of 
pathological conditions have been found in bottomfish species from several 
of the most contaminated sites. These findings have served as useful 
indicators of environmental degradation in several parts of Puget Sound 
(Malins et al. 1984, Malins et al. 1985a,b). 

Certain types of pathological conditions have been most useful in identi¬ 
fying pollution-associated perturbations (Malins et al. 1984, Malins et al. 
1985a&b). Many of the lesions have a suspected chemical etiology because 
they are morphologically similar to lesions observed in laboratory rodents 
and fish exposed to toxic and/or carcinogenic chemicals. 

This paper will briefly outline the distribution of environmental conta¬ 
mination in bottom sediments and fish from Puget Sound (Figure 1) and 
discuss the possible inpacts of these contaminants on the health and 
reproduction of fish. Most of the infonnation presented in this summary 
is the result of studies conducted by scientists of the Environmental 
Conservation Division of the Northwest and Alaska Fisheries Center in 
Seattle. 

Chemical Contamination 


A wide variety of anthropogenic chemicals, some in high concentrations, 
have been found in sediments from a number of sites in Puget Sound. For 
example, in studies oonducted in Commencement Bay, we detected more than 
900 individual organic compounds — including over 500 AHs, hundreds of 
chlorinated hydrocarbons, as well as various compounds containing nitrogen, 
oxygen, sulfur and bromine (Malins et al. 1982). There are indications 
that many other chemicals are present [especially in the Everett Harbor 
(Malins et al. 1983)]; however, their numbers and identities have not been 
elucidated because of the limitations of the analytical technic^s. We 
also found mean concentrations of aromatic hydrocarbons (AHs) in sediment 


83 




President Point 
Port Madison 



Everett Harbor 
Everett 


West Point 
Denny Way CSO 


Duwamish Waterway 


Hylebos Waterway 


Hympia 


-Nisqually River 


Figure 1 


84 












(all sedinent concentrations are expressed on a dry weight basis) from 
urbanized and/or industrialized sites — Canmencement Bay, Elliott Bay, 

Eagle Harbor, Mukilteo, and Everett Harbor — to be at least 150 times 
higher than the mean concentration in sediments from the nonurban embay- 
ments — Case Inlet and Port Madison (Malins et al, 1984). Within these 
urban areas, the values of AHs varied considerably with respect to indi¬ 
vidual stations (e.g., 150 to 63,000 ppb in Elliott Bay) (Figure 2). So 
far, the highest concentrations of summed AHs (120,000 ng/g) were detected 
in sediments frcm Eagle Harbor; moreover, over 200 nitrogen containing 
aromatic compounds vere also present in these sediments (Malins et al. 

1985a, Krone et al. 1987). 

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and a variety of chlorinated butadienes 
(CBDs) v^re found in virtually every sediment sample from Puget Sound 
(Malins et al. 1984). Concentrations of PCBs were usually much higher in 
sediments from most of the sites in Elliott and Commencement Bays corrpared 
to those in sediments from sites in non-urban areas (Figure 4). The 
concentrations of CBDs were substantially higher in Conmencement Bay 
(Figure 3B). 

Arsenic concentrations were also consistently higher in the major 
urban areas (Commencement and Elliott Bays) than in the nonurban areas, 
whereas the mean concentrations of cadmium were generally similar in all 
areas. 

We also found that food organisms in the stomachs of the English 

sole ( Parophrys vetulus ) from selected areas, such as Eagle Harbor (Malins 

et al. 1985a) and near Mukilteo (Malins et al. 1985b), contained 

substantially higher concentrations of AHs than comparable organisms from 

reference sites. For example, the sums of the concentrations of AHs in 

two composites of food organisms (from five fish each) from Eagle Harbor 

were 50,000 and 84,000 ng/g, respectively. The concentrations of 

individual AHs in a composite of benthic food organisms (frcm 

six fish) frcm President Point did not exceed 100 ng/g. These findings 

suggest that consumption of sediment-dv^lling organisms provides an 

important route of uptake of enviorrmental contaminants. 

Metabolically resistant organic chemicals, such as PCBs, were found in the 
muscle tissues of English sole frcm many Puget Sound sites. In a recently 
completed study of PCB concentrations in the muscle tissue of English sole, 
we found that highest concentrations (based on analyses of tissue ccmpo- 
sites of five fish each) in sole from the Duwamish Waterway (6,900 ng/g) 
and the Hylebos waterway (2,800 ng/g) (Malins et al., 1986) (Figure 5). 
English sole from the Case Inlet reference site had muscle concentrations 
of 400 ng/g. Complimentary laboratory studies suggest that uptake of 
PCBs from bottom sediments is an important route of bioaccumulation of 
these chanicals by English sole. English sole held for several weeks in 
aquaria containing sedinent from the Duwamish Waterway bioaccumulated 
significant levels of PCBs in liver and muscle tissue (Stein et al. 1987). 

In contrast to PCBs, concentrations of the more metabolically labile organic 


85 



120000,- 




o 

o 

o 

o 


■i 

o 

o 

o 

00 


o 

o 

o 

o 

(O 


o 

o 

o 

o 


o 

o 

o 

o 

<N 


9 

c33 


w cS 

I ^ 

•5.S 


2 « 
e i 
I s 

Q > 




>> 

cO 

«co 

QO 


« 


o 

3 

9 

s 


el 

§! S3 

WK 


09 


(qdd) uopBJ^^uaouoQ 



CM 


86 


Fi niirP 
























1200 


o 

o 

00 


o 

o 


m 0) 
A '2 

oS 


>» 
(0 
CO > 

i ^ 


>» 

§ ^ 
rt 

3.® 

>» 

io 

®CQ 

Oo 


Wi 

US 


c 

S « 

£s 


1| 

> 3 

US 


(U 

S- 


C7> 




(qdd) uoi^BJ^^uaDuo^ 


87 


Sampling Sites 



















800 



m 4^ 

a <u 
e3'3 


>» 
cs 
a > 


.2 

s d 
Q^ 


>> 

cO 

qS 


Wffi 


c 

s 

fe «9 


I 

s 


t5 

2 | 

wffi 


(qdd) uoi:^BJ^uaDuoQ 


88 


Sampling Sites 














v-.* 


>» 
to 03 

K| 


^ -S 

C 'c 
.5 ^ 

CO 


>» 
to eS 
5. 

e £ 

ca S 

3 jS 
Q ^ 


^o 

>»CO 

c O 

c 

0) 

Q 


« o 

« « 
W K 


£| 

> « 

u s 


OJ 

s- 

ZJ 

CD 


CO 


<N 


(qdd) uOI:^BJ:^u^^uo^ 


89 


Sampling Site 























compounds (e.g., AHs) (Varanasi and Gmur 1981) were generally below the 
limits of detection in the muscle and liver of English sole captured in 
areas with highly contaminated sediment. In this regard, new HPLC- 
fluorescence techniques developed in our laboratory by Krahn et al. 

(1985) allow measurement of concentrations of metabolites of aromatic 
canpounds in the bile. For example, in a study of English sole captured 
from 11 sites in Puget Sound (Krahn et al. 1986), high concentrations of 
metabolites which fluoresce at the BaP wavelength pair (380/430 nm) were 
found in bile of fish from Eagle Harbor (2,100 + 1,500 ng/g) and the 
Duwamish Waterway (1,400+ 2,200 ng/g), compared to bile of fish from 
reference sites where concentrations were at least 20 times less (Figure 
6). Our laboratory studies have also demonstrated that bottcm sediments 
serve as inportant sources of aromtic compounds for English sole. Vhen 
English sole were placed on sediment from the Duwamish River, a signi¬ 
ficant increase in the fluorescence at wavelengths appropriate for 
naphthalene, phenanthrene and BaP in bile was observed over a period of 
several weeks. VJiereas the fish placed on a reference sediment from 
near the Dosewallips River did not show any increase in bile fluorescence 
(Varanasi et al. 1985, Stein et al. 1987). These results indicate a 
continuous uptake of sediment-associated AHs in fish exposed to 
contaminated sediment. 

In another recently completed study we found that downstream migrant 
juveniles of certain Pacific salmon species are exposed to chemical 
contaminants as they pass through polluted urban estuaries (Malins et al. 
1987). For example, mean concentrations of PCBs in stomach contents and 
livers (Figure 1) of Oncorhynchus tshawytscha were three times higher 
than salmon from the Nisqually River, an estuary in a rural region of 
southern Puget Sound. The mean concentration of summed AHs in stomach 
contents of EXjwamish Waterway salmon was over 600 times higher than that 
for reference salmon (Figure 8A). The mean concentration of bile meta¬ 
bolites which fluoresce at the BaP wavelength pair were over 20 times 
higher in IXiwamish Waterway salmon canpared to Nisqually River salmon 
(Figure 8B). Vfe presently do not knew if exposure to these toxic 
chemicals canpremises the health of these young salnxjn. 


Pathological Conditions 

Hepatic neoplasms and other diseases, have been shown to occur in high 
prevalences in English sole and certain other bottom-dwelling fish living 
in waters adjacent to various urban (industrialized) areas in Puget Sound 
(Wbllings et al. 1976; Malins et al. 1984, Malins et al. 1985a,b). A 
limited number of studies have indicated that certain diseases are closely 
associated with the presence of elevated levels of such toxic chemicals 
as AHs and CHs in the sediments. The principal types of urban-associated 
diseases reported in these fish species have included a variety of hepatic 
lesions (e.g. neoplasms, "preneoplasms", hepatocellular degeneration/necro¬ 
sis) and fin erosion. 

Several of our investigations have detected hepatic neoplasms in bottan- 
fish species from Puget Sound (Malins et al. 1984, 1985a, 1985b; McCain 
et al. 1982) The highest prevalences of hepatic neoplasns were found in 


90 





vwwvxxwvo wwwwxwx* 





+ 




o 


(qdd) uopBJ^uaouoQ 


91 


Everett Mukilteo Port Eagle Denny Way Duwamish Hylebos Case 

Harbor Madison Harbor CSO Waterway Waterway Inlet 

Sampling Sites 





























03 ed 

i i 

od S 

I « 


« S 3 

E > 

O* •»5 

jz: 


= 

§ ^ 
O' 

03 od 

z« 



^ >v 

.2 g 

e £ 

od a3 

S O 
Q ^ 


|> 

«2 


§ 

o*iJ 
03 ed 

gw 



t: 

TJ 


92 


Stomach Contents Liver 






















OOS'T OOS‘86 Y OOO'OOT 



2 


1 * 

eS 0) 

o0 


a 9> 

s > 

S'#! 


I 

I 

O 

O 

'S 

§ 

I 


(^q3iaM ^ip) qdd 


00 


93 


Figure 














(%) aoua^BAajj 


94 


Sampling Sites 
























OiD 



95 


Figure 10 

















66 % 041 } 



(%) 0DU0|BA0JJ 


96 


Harbor Madison Harbor Way CSO Waterway Waterway Inlet 

Site Location 













Several of our investigations have detected hepatic neoplasms in bottcxn- 
fish species frcm Puget Sound (Malins et al. 1984, 1985a, 1985b; McCain 
et al, 1982) The highest prevalences of hepatic neoplasms were found in 
English sole from the lower Duwamish Waterway in Elliott Bay (16.8%, 
n=215; Malins et al. 1984) and Eagle Harbor (18.4%, n=14; Malins et al. 
1985a) (Figure 8). Somewhat lower prevalences of hepatic neoplasms in 
English sole were found in Everett Harbor, near Makilteo, and in the 
Hylebos Waterway in Commencement Bay; they ranged fron 5 to 9% (Malins et 
al. 1984, 1985b). With respect to hepatic neoplasms in rock sole 
( Lepidopsetta bilineata ), the areas having the highest lesion prevalences 
v^re the Everett Harbor (4.7%, n=43) and Ccmmencement Bay's Hylebos 
Waterway (2.5%, n=159) (Malins et al. 1984). Hepatic neoplasms were 
found in rock sole from all of the urban embayments at prevalences from 
0.7 to 4.7%. Pacific staghorn sculpin ( Leptocottus armatus ) with hepatic 
neoplasms were found only in Commencement Bay (1.7%, n=116) (Malins et 
al. 1984). Starry flounder ( Platichthys stellatus ) with hepatic neoplasms 
have been detected only in fish from the EXiwamish Waterway (1.1%, n=262) 
(McCain et al. 1982). In early studies (Malins et al. 1984, McCain et 
al. 1982), hepatic neoplasms were not found in English sole (n=282) from 
any nonurban areas studied (e.g.. Case Inlet, Port Madison, and McAllister 
Creek). However, in subsequent studies conducted in 1984 and 1985, we 
detected liver neoplasms in English sole from Case Inlet and Port Madison 
(Figure 8) (Malins et al. 1986). The tumor-bearing individuals found at 
the two reference sites tended to be older (>^5 years) fish. 

The other types of urban-associated liver lesions were also found in the 
highest prevalences in sole from areas near Seattle, Tacoma, and Everett, 
and in other highly contaminated areas, including Eagle Harbor. Prevalen¬ 
ces of "preneoplastic" liver lesions in sole from these areas ranged fron 
10-36% (Figure 10). Low prevalences (0.8 to 3.9%) of this lesion type 
have been detected in sole frcm the reference sites (e.g. Case Inlet and 
Port Madison). The prevalences of specific degeneration necrosis at 
urban/industrial sites ranged from 19.4% (n=222) in the Hylebos Waterway 
to 65.9% (n=141) in Eagle Harbor (Figure 11). This lesion type was 
detected in only 0.8 and 3.1% of the English sole frcm Case Inlet and 
Port Madison, respectively. 

Studies of the Etiology of Pathological Conditions 

Because of the consistent association of liver neoplasms in English sole 
with chanically contaminated environments in Puget Sound, we investigated 
the relationships between prevalences of liver neoplasms and concentra¬ 
tions of certain groups of chemicals in bottom sediments and fish tissues 
(Malins et al. 1984). In order to simplify the complex data set on sedi¬ 
ment concentrations of 28 metals and 36 AHs and chlorinated hydrocarbons 
(CHs) from 40 sampling stations at which both fish and sediment vere 
collected, we perfonned factor analysis. This mathematical method sorted 
into groups those chemicals whose concentrations in sediments correlate 
positively with each other, and yielded four major factors (groups) which 
accounted for 75% of the variance in the concentrations of chemicals 
among the stations. Group 1 was dominated by the AHs, Group 2 by the 
iTBtals, Group 3 by PCBs and selected metals, and Group 4 by CHs. 


97 









XSediment AH*s J ( XSediment CBD’s 





o 
^ o 
o o 


a> 

’.s 

Q. 

M 
4^ 

4» 

U 

s 

4> 

“‘V’Sod 

S o.^ d VI 
2 ® VI 

l«vi VI 
y c4 ^ e 

.S S ^ - C § 
S c c ^ 

o-s 3 

ts It; c oc 

•2 o 'S c w)*5 

s C.«»-a; 

0^15 
«S *3* «2i 51! «> 
^ a> ^ C 4> 

^ II " II" 

^ • # # * 
^ B « * « « 


cvj 


(U 

S- 

Z3 

a> 


98 























Using the Spearman rank correlation coefficient procedure, ve found a sig¬ 
nificant (p=0.003) positive correlation (rg=0.48) between the prevalence 
of hepatic neoplasms in English sole and sediment concentrations of AHs 
(1st grcup) (Malins et al. 1984). Moreover, in a recently completed 
summary analysis of the data from the original study of 40 stations 
combined with data from subsequent studies of 30 stations (e.g., stations 
in Eagle Harbor and near Mikilteo), a significant (p=0.0001) positive 
correlation between concentrations of sediment-associated AHs and the 
prevalence of hepatic neoplasms was found using Spearman rank 
correlation (Table 1). 

We also performed a detailed analysis of the results of six field studies 
using logistic regression (Malins et al. 1987). This method permits the 
construction of a series of multivariate statistical nodels relating the 
prevalences of particular categories of lesions to the combined levels of 
several different categories of sediment-associated contaminants. Speci¬ 
fically, logistic regression was used to assess the relationships between 
neoplasm prevalence, fish length, and sediment concentrations of three 
classes of chemical compounds (AHs, PCBs, and CBDs). The best logistic 
regression model for neoplasnus prevalence accounted for 40.4% of the 
variation in neoplasm prevalence among the 59 collections of fish at the 
46 stations sampled (Malins et al. 1987) (Figure 12). Neoplasm preva¬ 
lences v^re positively correlated with sediment concentrations of both 
AHs (p£0.00001) and PCBs (p^O.OOOl), but negatively correlated with 
sediment concentrations of CBDs (p£0.05). ^feoplasm prevalences were also 
n^atively correlated with the interaction term for AHs and PCBs (p£0.0001). 
Fish size range exerted an important effect (p^O.OOOOl), with observed 
neoplasm prevalence being greater when only large fish were collected 
than when the entire size range was employed. 

Bile metabolite concentrations measured (at the BaP wavelength pair) in 
English sole from 11 sites in Puget Sound were also compared statistically 
(Spearman rank correlation) to the prevalences of certain types of hepatic 
lesions, including neoplasms in these fish (Table 2) (Krahn et al, 1986). 

A significant (p<0.002) positive correlation (rg=0.85) was found. These 
results provide supportive evidence for the putative relationship betveen 
the arcmatic compounds found in the environment and serious liver diseases 
in bottom-dv^lling fish such as the hepatic neoplasm. 

Studies conducted by our laboaratory yielded results suggesting that the 
presence of certain liver lesions in English sole is associated with im¬ 
paired organ function. Casillas et al. (1985) found an association be¬ 
tween certain liver lesions and abnormal values of several serum chemistry 
parameters characteristic of liver dysfunction and/or damage (Table 3). 

For example, sole with neoplasms had significantly (p£0.05) higher serum 
concentrations of bilirubin, and significantly lower concentrations of 
albumin and calcium. 


99 


Table 1. Correlations between neoplasm prevalence in English sole and AH 
concentration in bottom sediments and results of Fisher's 
con^bined probability testirg (fron Malins et al. 1986b). 


Sampling 

Period 

No. of 
stations 

No. of 
tests 

Adjusted 

Signif. 

level 

Neoplasm 

J^s 

Signif- (p) 
icance 

1979-80 

31 

16 

0.0030 

0.48 

0.003 

1982 

4 

4 

0.0125 

0.60 

0.200 

1983 

2 

4 

0.0125 

1.00 

0.500 

1983-84 

11 

4 

0.0125 

0.35 

0.148 

1984 

4 

4 

0.0125 

1.00 

0.001 

1984 

9 

4 

0.0125 

0.54 

0.066 


Results of Fishers Canbined Probability Testing 


No. of studies in agreement 6 
Combined test statistic 39.296 
df 12 
Significance 0.0001 
Adjusted combined signif. level 0.0125 


100 





Table 2. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients (rg) and significance 

levels for prevalences of hepatic lesions and mean concentrations 
of bile metabolites measured at benzo[a]pyrene fluorescence 
wavelengths of English sole from 11 Puget Sound sites (from Krahn 
et al. 1986). 


Lesion type 

^s 

Significance 

level* 

Neoplasms 

0.853 

<0.002 

Foci of cellular alteration 

0.773 

<0.01 

Megalocytic hepatosis 

0.891 

<0.001 

Steatosis/hemosiderosis 

0.409 

<0.5 

Total hepatic lesions 

0.834 

<0.005 


* Underlined values indicate results significant at a level chosen to 
adjust for the number of pair-wise tests performed (0.0125). 










Table 3. Significant changes (p£0.05) in serum chanistry of English sole 
(149 fish) with various liver lesions. Values represent percent 
change relative to normal sole (11 fish). 


Serum Chemistry 


Liver lesion 

ALAT 

Glucose 

Billirubin 

Albumin 

Calcium 

Specific 

+33% 

-9% 

+31% 

-13% 

—a 

necrosis 

Preneoplastic 

— 

-3% 

+31% 

-12% 

— 

lesions 

Neoplasms 

— 

— 

+31% 

-19% 

-14% 


^ — indicates no significant difference. 


102 











Effects on Fish Reproduction 


It is clear that prevalences of certain diseases are higher in bottom¬ 
dwelling fish fran the chemically contaminated areas of Puget Sound, 
caipared to similar species fron minimally contaminated areas. Field 
studies have recently been conducted to evaluate if ejqxDSure to conta¬ 
minated envirorments affects the reproductive capacity of bottcmfish 
species. 

In one series of investigations with English sole, we collected gravid 
females frcm contaminated sites and minimally contaminated sites, and 
induced them to spawn in the laboratory. The eggs were fertilized with 
pooled suspensions of sperm from several males. The mean percentages of 
eggs fertilized during this procedure was significantly (p£0.05) Icwer 
for eggs (37+27%) from females with one or more serious liver lesions 
than those for eggs (52+30%) frcm females with no detectable liver lesions 
(Figure 11). Similarly, the mean percentage of viable larvae produced by 
fertilized eggs was significantly (p£0.05) lower for eggs (24+22%) frcm 
females with one or more types of liver lesions coirpared with those of 
eggs (34+25%) frcm, apparently, "lesion free" sole (Fig. 13). 

In cin ongoing study, adult (>30cm) female English sole are collected 
throughout the prespawning period for two consecutive cycles at 
contaminated sites (the EXiwamish Waterway and Eagle Harbor), minimally 
contaminated sites (near Sinclair Inlet), and at a reference site (Port 
Susan). Three types of measurements are used to evaluate ovarian 
development; (1) the presence or absence of signs of vitellogenesis [a 
stage of oocyte development characterized by the appearance of yolk 
globules (Wallace and Selman 1981)] in the ovaries, as determined by 
histological examination; (2) plasma concentrations of estradiol; and (3) 
gonadosomatic index (GSI), the weight of the ovary divided by the fish's 
body weight — results to date show that females frcm contaminated sites 
with one or more serious liver lesions had significantly (p£0.05) lower 
GSI values (4.9+4.12) than did females with no detectable lesions (6.5 + 
5.1). Additional biochemical and chemical parameters measured are: 
activities of hepatic xenobiotic metabolizing enzymes (HXME), 
concentrations of PCBs in liver and ovary, and concentrations of aromatic 
compounds in bile. In a complementary laboratory study, sediment extracts 
are administered to gravid female sole to gauge the subsequent reproductive 
success of the fish. Both field and laboratory studies use fertilization 
success (eggs fertilized/eggs spawned) and hatchability (eggs successfully 
hatched/eggs fertilized) to determine the reproductive viability of the 
sole's eggs. Evaluation of the results from this two year study should 
provide in-depth information on whether contaminant exposure impairs 
reproductive processes in English sole. 

Conclusions 

Wb have clearly demonstrated that bottcmfish frcm a few localized areas 
in Puget Sound near urban centers or other areas receiving heavy inputs 


103 





luaojad 


104 


Significantly lower (p < 0.05) 


















of environnental contaminants have high body burdens of toxic chemicals 
and serious pathological conditions (i.e., liver neoplasnns). In addition, 
very recent studies of juvenile Chinook salmon captured in Seattle's 
EXiwamish Waterway have shown that these fish have substantial body burdens 
of contaminants, (The potential effects on the health of these juvenile 
salmon exposed to these toxic chenicals are yet to be assessed.) 

TO date we have successfully employed a multidisciplinary approach to 
investigate pollution and its effects in Puget Sound. Following this 
approach we are further developing sensitive chemical and biological 
indicators of pollution for use in assessing pollution impact in 
estuarine and coastal areas. More investigations of cause-and-effect 
relationships between observed biological effects such as fish diseases 
and environmental contaminants are also being conducted. At present, 
evidence linking fish diseases, such as liver tumors, to specific classes 
of chemicals is based on circumstantial evidence obtained in field studies. 
These investigations should include additional field studies, as well as 
controlled laboratory studies. For example, studies in progress in our 
laboratory involve a series of long-term (1 to 2 year) exposures of 
English sole and rainbow trout to selected fractions of extracts of 
sediments fron contaminated sites in Puget Sound and to selected individual 
compounds known to be carcinogenic in laboratory mammals. Fish are 
periodically sacrificed and examined for histopathological conditions in 
the liver. Information on cause-and-effect relationships betv^en 
biological perturbations and individual chemicals or groups of chemicals 
can help implement source control and/or clean up actions by regulatory 
agencies. 


105 


FIGURES 


Figure 

Figure 

Figure 

Figure 

Figure 

Figure 

Figure 

Figure 

Figure 

Figure 


1. Map of Puget Sound showing locations of selected sampling sites. 

2. Mean concentrations (ppb, dry weight + SD) of AHs in sediment 
samples from selected Puget Sound sites. 

3. Mean concentrations (ppb, dry v^ight) of PCBs in sediment 
samples from selected sites in Puget Sound. 

4. Mean concentrations (ppb, dry weight) of chlorinated butadienes 
(CBDs) in sediment samples from selected sites in Puget Sound. 

5. Mean concentrations (ppb, dry weight) of PCBs in muscle tissues 
of English sole from seven sites in Puget Sound. Each value 
represents an analysis of a conposite of tissues from five 
individual fish. 

6. Mean concentrations (ppb, v^t weight + SD) of metabolites of 
aromtic conpounds, measured at BaP wavelengths, in bile of 
English sole from selected sites in Puget Sound. Each value 
is the mean of 18 to 37 analyses. (Malins et al. 1986b). 

7. Mean concentrations (ppb, dry weight) of PCBs in stomach content 
(A) and liver (B) samples from juvenile Chinook salmon taken 
frcra either the Nisqually River Hatchery, the estuary of the 
Nisqually River (reference site), or the IXiwamish Waterway. 

Each vaule is the mean of analyses of two composite samples (30 
fish per conposite). 

8. (A) Mean concentrations (ppb, dry weight) of summed AHs in 
stomach content samples from juvenile Chinook salmon. (B) Mean 
concentrations (ppb, wet weight) of metabolites of aromatic 
compounds, measured at BaP wavelengths (Krahn et al. 1985) in 
bile of juvenile Chinook salmon. For both (A) and (B), fish 
were captured in either the estuary of the Nisqually River or 
the Duwamish Waterway. Each value is the mean of analyses of 
two composite samples (30 fish per composite). 

9. Prevalences (%) of liver neoplasms in English sole from selected 
sites in Puget Sound. The number of animals examined between 
1979 and 1985 at each site is indicated as (n). 

10. Prevalences (%) of foci of cellular alterations ("preneoplastic" 
lesions) in English sole frcm selected sites in Puget Sound. 

Sole were collected and examined histologically between 1979 and 
1985). The number of fish examined at each site is indicated as 
(n). 


106 


Figure 11 


. Prevalences (%) of hepatocellular specific degeneration/necrosis 
(SDN) in English sole from selected sites in Puget Sound. Sole 
were collected and examined histologically between 1979 and 
1985). The number of fish examined at each site is indicated as 
(n). 

Figure 12. Summary of logistic regression analysis relating sediment concen¬ 
trations of xenobiotics to prevalences of liver neoplasms among 
English sole. Results are expressed as percent of variation 
in neoplasm prevalence. Analysis was based on data from 6 field 
surveys conducted between 1979 and the present, in which 2697 
sole from 46 locations in Puget Sound were examined and 123 
cases of hepatic neoplasms were diagnosed. The overall model 
(AHs + PCBs + size - CBDs - [AH + PCB interaction] ) accounts for 
40.4% of the observed variation in neoplasm prevalene (n.s. = 
effect not significant, p£0.05;* = effect significant, p£0.01;** 

= effect significant, p<0.001;*** = effect significant p£0.0001; 
**** = effect significant, p<0.00001. 

Figure 13. The reproductive success of gravid English sole from Puget Sound 
with or without detectable serious liver lesions. The results 
are based on 65 crosses involving 33 females with serious liver 
lesions, and 158 crosses involving 79 females with no liver 
lesions. 


107 


References 


Casillas, E., M.S. Myers, L.D. Rhodes, and B.B. McCain. 1985. Serum 
chemistry of diseased English sole (Parophrys vetulus) from polluted 
areas of Puget Sound, WA. J. Fish Diseases 8:437-449. 

Krahn, M.M., Myers, M.S., D.G. Burrows, D.C. Malins. 1984. Determination 
of metabolites of xenobiotics in bile of fish from polluted waterways. 
Xenobiotica 14, 633-646. 

Krahn, M.M., L.D. Rhodes, M.S. Myers, L.K. Moore, W.D. MacLeod, Jr., and 
D.C. Malins. 1986. Associations between metabolites of aromatic com¬ 
pounds in bile and the occurrrence of hepatic lesions in English sole 
( Parophrys vetulus ) from Puget Sound, Washington. Arch. Environ. Contam. 
Toxicol. 15, 61-67. 

Krone, C.A., D.G. Burrows, D.W. Brown, P.A.Robisch, A.J. Friedman, and 
D.C. Malins. (1986). Nitrogen-containing aromatic compounds in sediments 
from a polluted harbor in Puget Sound. Environ. Sci. Technol. 20, 
1144-1150. 

Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, D.W. Brown, A.K. Sparks, H.O. Hodgins and S- 
L. Chan. 1982. Chemical contaminants and abnormalities in fish and 
invertebrates from Puget Sound. NOAA Tech. MEMO, OMPA-19, 168 p. 

Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, M.S. Myers, D.W. Brown and S-L. Chan. 1983. 
Liver diseases of bottomfish frcm Everett Harbor, Washington. Coastal 
Ocean Pollution Assessment News 2:41-42. 

Malins, D.C., M.M. Krahn, D.W. Brcwn, L.D. Rhodes, M.S. Myers, B.B. 

McCain, S-L. Chan. 1985a. Toxic chemicals in marine sediment and biota 
from Mukilteo, Washington: Relationships with hepatic neoplasms and 
other hepatic lesions in English sole ( Parophrys vetulus ). J. Nat. 

Cancer Inst. 74, 487-494. 

Malins, D.C., M.M. Krahn, M.S. Ntyers, L.D. Rhodes, D.W. Brcwn, C.A. 

Krone, B.B. McCain, S-L. Chan. 1985b. Toxic chemicals in sediments and 
biota fron creosote-polluted harbor: Relationships with hepatic neo¬ 
plasms and other hepatic lesions in English sole ( Parophrys vetulus ). 
Carcinogenesis 6, 1463-1469. 

Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, D.W. Brown, S-L. Chan, M.S. Myers, J.T. Landahl, 
P.G. Prohaska, A.J. Friedman, L.D. Rhodes, D.G. Burrows, W.D. Gronlund 
and H.O. Hodgins. 1984. Chemical pollutants in sediments and diseases in 
bottom-dwelling fish in Puget Sound, Washington. Environ. Sci. Technol. 
18, 705-713. 

Malins, D.C., M.H. Schiewe, B.B. McCain, D.W. Brcwn, U. Varanasi, W.T. 
Roubal, S-L. Chan. 1986. Etiology of tumors in botton-dwelling marine 
fish. Annual Report to the Natl. Cancer Inst, 38p. 


108 








Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, J.T. Landahl, M.S. I^ers, S-L. Chan, and W.T. 
Roubal. 1987, Neoplastic and other diseases in fish in relation to toxic 
chemicals. Aquatic Toxicology (In Press). 

McCain, B.B., M.S. Myers, U. Varanasi, D.W. Brown, L.D. Rhodes, W.D. 
Gronlund, D.G. Elliott, W.A. Palsson, H.O. Hodgins and D.C. Malins. 

1982. Pathology of two species of flatfish from urban estuaries in 
Puget Sound. * NQAA/EPA Report EPA-60/7-82-001, 100 p. 

Stein, J.E., T. Horn, E. Casillas, A. Friedman, and U. Varanasi. 1987. 
Simultaneous exposure of English sole (Parophrys vetulus) to sediment- 
associated xenobiotics: Part 2 - Chronic exposure to an urban 
estuarine sediment with added ^H-benzo[a]pyrene and 14C-polychlorinated 
biphenyls. Mar. Envior. Res. (in press). 

Varanasi, U., W.L. Reichert, J.E. Stein, D.W. Brown, and H.R. Sandbom. 
1985. Bioavailability and biotransformation of aromatic hydrocarbons 
in benthic organisms exposed to sediment from an urban estuary. 

Environ. Sci. and Tech. 19, 836-841. 

Varanasi, U. and D.J. Gmur. 1981. Hydrocarbons and metabolites in 
English sole ( Parophrys vetulus ) exposed simultaneously to 
[^H] benzo [a] pyrene and [1‘^C] naphthalene in oil-contaminated sediment. 
Aquat. Toxicol. 1, 49-67. 

Wallace, R.A. and K. Selman. 1981. Cellular and dynamic aspects of 
oocyte growth in teleosts. Amer Zool. 21:325-343. 

Wbllir^s, S.R., C.E. Alpers, B.B. McCain and B.S. Miller, 1976. Fin 
erosion disease of starry flounder ( Platichthys stellatus ) and English 
sole ( Parophrys vetulus ) in the estuary of the Duwamish River, Seattle, 
Washington. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 33, 
2577-2586. 


109 
















... .. . _ . , ,rtt-0':i^ .«♦^^ 

, .j(.. ■' ■^■■r AX^imit> 




%y 'v 


IsetiC'-ra 


/t-4[' r*T«k'ir:^ .^ *- ~ 

*■ •1-* ■ •—,6liiifihcntf)*':-::r' 

ci r\-i|t'Mi^-'>-' v ♦?>•■■'■* -v;^ ^ 

* 'V# ^ "'?-Vl4:‘«:''*-'--riJi^ 

r; ,» ■ :■ ^. ‘ 

■ ■ 4^fi'm, ' .,’ .' :*■■' ^ .i ^»m4? .T ,Ab 

•^»t'i^&itiiHR. 05 (ft. ■■ , r■^-,■ ?J^, f. 1» Jr, fi.» rm; ^ ^ ^ J a^>tin|t|friy|g ^ 

lEr^., .fii^;5>4i^'^,.j. r„t 'Jl .■■ -rvr-' • -'^*^4 -y ■ * li'-’ *'. h*Jiri ->o«a^^ 

«>.' 4>Ddhr.iriiW< ^ s«w-^r y. 

,. - *• ^:i... .t.'^ - >«r**?r i«»' .mxi^'.^qij; 

?fw°^-' irfa-jiuf=W-iS' •'f-.i 'V»< *f^if, 4 } ♦^•»fc * f iv’i'ftj". ill *4*^ ■, *0 .,Jaiii&,'|*^j 

C-'*'#c _ .... a>. j*iiirl«|C3 ni ;;;> 

■ ’^.:- .. tf^ .ifv'*T5» i#^c 4frC V>«S[f^»i3 ^ 

^'**<<.■4 -r^ ' .;i ♦■■ •^•■f ■ . -• ■ '"*811^^:“.' 

f.toti - -tiir^vii^ >w^i ^^smc ,lr**j «a»^»ii .u | 

ci:^ -V jpM» { | |y,r;, ^^ . 

1^1'ih. -‘-- t»s;-^ i.vv* v»lflii tt* i.** 



^i ■ .jauai^ 

4u ' • >, *> i'Ufc 




X«r^ >»►. .*•?« 'UJMlPtr^ 


.Tf'-f;, 'VVil' 

j|5.iar^-,* »i!iihi'w^_-V) 

V‘‘" -- ' 

ni^ . ,^t^ii ,1iflil ttM , - ii jjr^t. I'yl distil 45.(1- .r.'?'«itA •♦W-0k 



*,*■*» /i .' 




'■■4''w 

i»» 


j. 


-;■ ?;, r «.V.\k9'4U» 

- ',5. :. - 

^ '* y.M 



■'(f ■■'- * ' 

■;,^ -**. •<^.r cma, hjR4, 
T||4l»*r..,fi -r.:. --il 

‘;44t. 


H-m ; .1 
«V‘.sl . 



tv,' in*J 





CONTAMINANT LEVELS IN THE EDIBLE PORTION OF RECREATIONALLY CAUGHT 
FISH FROM PUGET SOUND, WASHINGTON 


Marsha Landolt^, David A. Kalman^, and Ahmad E. Nevissi^ 

School of Fisheries^ and Department of Environmental Health^ 
University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 


Introduction 


High concentrations of organic and inorganic contaminants have been 
found in the sediments of some Puget Sound, Washington embayments, 
particularly those that are adjacent to urban areas (Malins et al., 

1982 a and b). Investigators have also found accumulations of xenobiotic 
compounds or metabolites in the liver and bile of fish (Malins et al., 

1980; Dexter et al., 1981), and in the lipids of marine mammals and 
birds (Riley et al., 1983; Calambokidis et al., 1984) collected from 
these areas. Although reports of this contamination have been widely 
publicized in local news media, the urban embayments of Puget Sound 
remain a popular fishing site for recreational anglers. 

In 1983 a study was initiated to determine the potential for recreational 
anglers to be exposed to contaminants through consumption of seafood 
caught near urban areas. The specific objectives of the study were (1) to 
identify the species most commonly caught by anglers in urban areas of 
Puget Sound; (2) to demographically characterize the anglers; (3) to 
characterize the fish consumption patterns of urban anglers (i.e. fishing 
frequency, amount of fish consumed, tissues eaten, method of preparation); 
(4) to assess the concentration of principal contaminants in the edible 
portions of commonly caught species; and (5) to estimate the quantity of 
selected chemicals consumed by anglers and their families. The major 
findings of the study will be summarized in this paper. Readers interested 
in obtaining a more detailed analysis of the study are referred to 
publications by Landolt et al. (1985 and 1987). 

Materials and Methods 


Demographic studies . Urban recreational anglers were interviewed over 
a two year period (November, 1983 to October, 1985). During the first 
year of the study shoreside anglers (n=4,181) were interviewed at fishing 
sites located along the waterfronts of four Puget Sound cities (Figure 1). 
During the second year of the study boating anglers (n=437) were interviewed 
as they returned to ramps in Seattle and Tacoma. 


Ill 






Figure 1. 


Location of study areas. 


112 





Interviews were scheduled so as to provide coverage of different seasons, 
days of the week, and times of day. A form describing weather and tidal 
conditions, number of anglers present, type of fishing activity, etc., was 
completed at the beginning of each survey period. 

All interviews were conducted anonymously, that is, names and addresses of 
anglers were not recorded. Demographic characteristics such as age, sex, 
race, ethnicity, occupation, and educational background were noted. To 
estimate fishing frequency, anglers were asked how often they fished in 
a given area and what type of fish they caught. To estimate consumption, 
each angler's catch was enumerated, the organisms were taxonomically 
identified (to species), and their length was measured. The anglers were 
asked whether they planned to consume their catch. If the answer was 
positive, they were asked which portions of the body would be eaten, how 
the tissue would be prepared, and whether other people would partake of it. 

Interview data were entered into and analyzed on the PRIME computer of 
the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services epidemiology 
laboratories, using SPSS Version 7.3 (Nie et al., 1975). Statistical tests 
used a two-tailed significance level of 0.05. 

Sample collection for chemical analysis . Based on interview data, several 
marine species commonly caught by urban anglers were selected for chemical 
analysis. The organisms were sampled off the piers and at other locations 
where interviews were conducted. The specimens were either caught with 
hook and line by the interviewers, were obtained from anglers, or were 
collected by trawling and beach seining. To prevent contamination of the 
samples, collectors avoided excess handling and unnecessary contact of the 
specimens with plastic bags, buckets, rags, docks, fishing piers, etc. 

The organisms were placed into glass jars which had been precleaned with 
detergent, acid rinsed, rinsed with dichloromethane and dried at 200 C. 

The lids were sealed with a Teflon lining. The specimens were kept cool 
on ice and transported to the University of Washington. Upon arrival in 
the laboratory, the jars were drained of excess water and placed in a 
freezer until dissection and analysis. 

Sample preparation for chemical analysis . At the time of analysis, the 
samples were thawed in their original glass jars and then transferred to 
solvent-rinsed aluminum foil. After species confirmation, the weight in 
grams and total length in centimeters were recorded along with any other 
pertinent information. 

The fish skin was cut with a solvent-rinsed scalpel blade and pulled back 
with forceps to expose the muscle tissue. To avoid contamination, a new 
scalpel blade and forceps were used to remove approximately 30 g of tissue. 
Since the specimens varied greatly in size and conformation, specific body 
sites were chosen to be dissected for each species. Approximately 10-30 g 
of muscle tissue were used for trace organic analysis, while two subsamples 
(7 g) were obtained for trace metal analysis and for calculating the 
wet/dry ratio. All samples and subsamples were stored frozen in solvent- 


113 




cleaned vials and jars with Teflon-lined lids. In some cases the liver 
was dissected and stored frozen in solvent-cleaned aluminum foil. 

Cooked samples for chemical analysis . In order to obtain a limited 
evaluation of the effect of cooking on contaminant dose, selected samples 
were subjected to a "standardized" cooking procedure. Based on interview 
results, pan-frying was the most common method of fish preparation. In 
order to minimize variations in cooking, a Teflon-coated electric fryer 
(wok) was used. This device had thermostatic control and a curved bottom 
that allowed minimal volumes of oil to be used. Blank analyses were 
conducted on the cooking oil (Wesson brand), the electric fryer, and the 
utensils used during cooking (Teflon-coated forceps). Preweighed fish 
samples (15-24 g) were placed in 50 ml of oil preheated to 200 +/- 10 C. 

The cooking proceeded for 3-5 minutes, and was halted when the appearance 
of the fish sample indicated complete cooking. The cooked fish was allowed 
to drain, and a cooked weight was then determined. Cooked samples were 
divided between organics analysis and metals assay. Procedures for analysis 
were identical to those used for raw fish (see succeeding sections). 

Trace metals analysis . For trace metal measurement, 0.3-0.5 g dried 
sample was accurately weighed and transferred into a 50 ml Teflon beaker. 

The sample was initially digested on a hotplate after adding 10 ml Ultrex 
HNO^ and covering the beaker with a Teflon cover. This treatment was 

enough to decompose most of the organic matter. To assure complete digestion, 
2 ml Ultrex HNO^ and 1 ml HCIO^ were added to the sample and the digestion 

continued to near dryness. If violent reactions were observed, the sample 
was cooled, an additional portion of HNO^ was added, and then the digestion 
was continued carefully. 

The final sample was diluted with 0.5 M HNO^ for instrumental analysis. 

The lipid content of the sample was not ashed completely and showed as a 
drop of oil on the surface of the diluted sample. The drop was removed to 
avoid interference. The instrumental analysis was carried out by flameless 
atomic absorption spectrophotometry (AA) for Ag, Cd, Cu, and Pb. 

For Hg measurement, 1-2 g wet tissue was accurately weighed and placed in 
glass bottles equipped with glass stoppers. After the bottles were chilled 
in ice water, 2 ml concentrated H 2 S 0 ^ and 2 ml 6 % KMNO^ solution were added 

sequentially to the samples under continuous stirring (Toffaletti and Savory, 
1975). The bottles were then capped and allowed to stand overnight to 
complete the digestion. Mercury was reduced with NaBH. and measured as 
cold vapor. ^ 

Neutron activation analysis (NAA) was conducted by standard comparison, in 
which samples of both known and unknown composition are irradiated together, 
and the elemental concentrations in the unknowns determined by comparison 
with the knowns. National Bureau of Standards reference materials were 
used as standards. 


114 




Quality control and quality assurance of the analytical work were approached 
through a three-tiered program. The first tier included the use of 
multiple analyses, blanks, standards additions, and primary standards. 

The second tier included review of laboratory practices and the application 
of splits, blanks, blinds, and replicates to guarantee performance. 

The third tier included periodically introducing blinds from outside 
laboratories and participation in round-robin proficiency testing 
programs with other laboratories. 

Trace organics analysis . Preweighed samples (approximately 10 g) were 
chopped and slurried with approximately 200 ml methylene chloride. Soxhlet 
extracted/activated anhydrous granular sodium sulfate (50 g) was added 
and the mixture ground for approximately 5 minutes using a Brinkman 
Polytron sonicating tissue homogenizer with PT 35K probe. After initial 
homogenization, each sample was spiked with 100 ul o,p'-DDE, perdeuterated 
perylene.The sample was then homogenized further using the PTIO probe. 
Additional sodium sulfate was added until the sample was efficiently 
dehydrated as indicated by the persistence of free granular sodium sulfate. 
When homogenization/dehydration was complete, the slurry was transferred 
to a fritted glass extraction thimble containing a bed of anhydrous sodium 
sulfate. The filled thimble was then transferred to a Soxhlet continuous 
extractor charged with 350-500 ml methylene chloride and extracted for 
24 hours. The extract was replaced with fresh solvent and the sample was 
reground and repacked in the thimble, with fresh sodium sulfate added as 
necessary, then extracted for an additional 24 hours. Careful Polytron 
cleaning, inspection and homogenization of blank solvent were used to 
ensure no cross-contamination between samples. The extracts were combined, 
concentrated to less than 10 ml, filtered through a 1 urn Gelman Acrodisc 0 
and diluted to exactly 10 ml, and a 5% aliquot removed for extracted 
residue weight determination. The remaining extract was concentrated to 
1 ml and diluted with 1 ml pentane prior to size exclusion preparative 
chromatography. Residue weights were determined by air drying to constant 
weight in a tared aluminum boat. 

Size exclusion chromatography (SEC) . SEC columns (SX-2 Biobeads, Biorrad, 
Inc.) were individually calibrated using a standard mixture containing 
hexachlorobutadiene, hexachlorobenzene, o,p'-DDE, p,p'-DDE, o,p'-DDD, 
p,p'-DDD, o,p'-DDT, p,p'-DDT, plus several PCB isomerids and several PAHs. 
They were eluted isocratically with 50% methylene chloride, 50% pentane 
solvent. Initial elution of the priority compounds (indicated by hexa- 
chloro-1,3-butadiene) typically began at 90-95 ml, with some non-target 
compounds (such as pthalates) and considerable biological background 
eluting in the 70-90 ml fraction. Three fractions were collected: 0-70 ml 
("FI", discarded or archived), 70-90 ml ("F2", archived), and 90-350 ml 
("F3", for further analysis). The elution behavior of each sample was 
verified by detection of fluorescent components (perdeuterated perylene 
plus endogenous PAH) with UV handlight, in a 150-250 ml elution volume range. 

Prepared extract concentrate (2 ml) in 50/50 methylene chloride/pentane 
was loaded on the SX-23 column bed, and the collection of eluate was begun. 


115 




Portions of elution solvent (2 ml) were used to transfer the sample 
quantitatively and to rinse down the walls of the column. The solvent 
reservoir of the column was then carefully filled without disturbing the 
chromatographic bed, and the elution continued to completion. Removal 
and replacement of the top 2 cm of column between samples, if insoluble 
or non-elution sample components were observed, could be accomplished 
without affecting the column calibration. 

Normal-phase liquid chromatography . Florisil (magnesium silicate, 60/100 
mesh, pesticide grade. Sigma Chemical) was cleaned, activated at 1250 C 
and stored at 100 C until use. The Florisil column (5 g slurry packed 
in 50/50 methylene chloride/pentane) was direct-coupled to the SEC column 
and switched into the flow after the "F3" elution cut was reached at 
90-95 ml. After elution of the "F3" fraction through the Florisil and 
collection, the Florisil column was decoupled from the SEC column and 
further eluted with 50 ml 10% diethylether in petroleum ether. This 
fraction ("F4") was concentrated and combined with "F3" for GC/ECD. 

Highly polar components were removed from the Florisil column with methanol 
and archived ("F5''). 

Gas chromatography/electron capture detection (GC/ECD) . Extracts were 
solvent exchanged into hexane, spiked with 100 ng/ml decafluorobenzophenone 
(internal standard 1) and 165 ug/ml octachloronaphthalene (internal standard 
2), and subjected to capillary GC/ECD. 

Multi-level internal standard-based response curves for each component 
were established during calibration and verified daily during this analysis. 
Although these curves are substantially linear, a quadratic response 
equation was used to 'fit the calibration data and to quantitate sample 
components. 

Raw chromatographic chart output and integrated response tables were 
manually inspected to verify proper peak integration, to identify merged 
components or other indications of interference, and to identify each 
component of interest, if present. Raw response areas for standard 
components and analytes were entered in an electronic spreadsheet program 
(Microsoft Excel run on a 512K Macintosh personal computer) for quantitation 
and reporting. Hand calculations were used to verify the accuracy of the 
final computations. 

Level 2 organics analysis . After completing the trace organics screen, some 
samples were selected for more detailed analysis ("level 2 analysis"). 

Final extracts (fractions "F3" and "F5" combined) were concentrated to 
100 ul and fractionated by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). 

A semi-preparative scale (10 mm i.d. x 250 mm, 5.0 urn amine-bonded 
normal phase, IBM Instruments, Inc.) column was used. Injections were 
made from a 250 ul partially-filled loop. Detection was accomplished 
using tandem UV absorbance (254 nm. Waters Model 480) and fluorescence 
(265 nm excitation and 370 nm emission; Schoeffel Model FS970) spectro¬ 
meters, each reporting to electronic integrators. Instrument response to 


116 






target PAH was calibrated prior to and following sample separations. 
Analytical results from the preparative fractionations were computed 
using external standard response curves. Two fractions were collected 
for analysis—an early, low molecular weight PAH (FB) and chlorinated 
hydrocarbon fraction, and a late high molecular weight PAH fraction (FD). 
These were concentrated to 10 and 50 ul, respectively, and spiked with 
perdeuterated phenanthrene internal standard (110 and 150 ng/ul, 
respectively) for GC/MS analysis. 

Analysis by GC/MS was performed using a Finnigan 4023 system, containing 
a Hewlett Packard 5840B gas chromatograph equipped for capillary analysis 
with direct transfer of the column through the vacuum manifold into the 
ionizer of the MS. All quantitation was based on internal standard; 1 ul 
injection volumes were used. 

Samples of chlorinated hydrocarbon fractions (FB) were reanalyzed by GC/ECO. 
The remaining sample was then diluted to 200 ul in hexane. An expanded 
standard containing additional pesticides was employed. 

Quality control for organics analysis . Quality control for study samples 
consisted of: internal recovery compounds in each sample, instrumental 
quality control, and replicate analysis. The recovery compounds used 
represented the target classes of contaminants ( pesticides, chlorinated 
hydrocarbons, PAH. Mean recoveries (standard error at 95% confidence) 
were: 2-chloronaphthalene—80.3 (4.3%), o,p'-DDE—80.6 (1.8%). Instrument 
quality control procedures consisted of daily blanks and reference 
standards interspersed with study samples. 

In addition to exchange of reference materials, interlab quality control 
included participation in an international PCB interlaboratory comparison 
sponsored by the International Commission for the Exploration of the 
Seas (ICES). The laboratory also participated in the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsored National Status and Trends 
Quality Assurance Program to measure PCB congeners in fish oil and in an 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)/Centers for Disease Control (CDC) 
project under the Superfund program. 

Results 


Demographic studies. The average shoreside angler was an employed (57.2%) 
male (91.6%) with 12 or more years of education (76.6%). Most were Caucasian 
(68.7%); however, black (8.1%) and Asian (20.9%) fishermen were regularly 
encountered. The anglers ranged widely in age with a large percentage 
falling in the 17-34 year (50.1%) and 35-64 year (35.2%) age brackets. 
Shoreside anglers fished almost as frequently on weekdays (48.8%) as on 
weekends (51.2%), and were most active between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 
midnight (56.2%). Although anglers fished year round, activity peaked in 
the Autumn (41,8%). More than half the anglers caught nothing (51.7%). 

Among those who did catch fish, most (70.7%) landed fewer than five per 
trip. The five most commonly caught species (based on numbers of organisms) 


117 






were market squid ( Loligo opalescens , 39% of catch). Pacific hake 
( Merluccius productus , 10% of catch), Pacific tomcod ( Microgadus proximus , 

5% of catch), walleye pollock ( Theragra chalcogramma ,4.9% of catch), and 
Pacific cod ( Gadus macrocephalus , 3.3% of catch). Overwhelmingly, the 
fishermen planned to consume only the fillet (93.2%). The most common 
modes of preparation were frying (53.2%), baking (16.8%), and boiling (11.1%). 

The average boating angler was an employed (68.8%) male (95.9%) with 12 or 
more years of education (91.4%). Most were Caucasian (86.1%); however, 
black (3.8%) and Asian (8.3%) fishermen were encountered regularly. The 
anglers ranged widely in age, with a large percentage falling in the 
19-39 year (59.9%) and 40-59 year (27.8%) age brackets. Boating anglers 
fished predominantly on weekends (95.9%) and were most active between the 
hours of noon to 6:00 p.m. (66.8%). Although fishing activity occured 
year round, it peaked during the Summer (56.8%). Only 37.1% of the anglers 
caught no fish. Among those catching fish, most (72%) landed fewer than 
five per trip. The five most commonly caught species (based on numbers of 
organisms) were walleye pollock ( 29.8% of catch). Pacific cod (15.5% of 
catch), flatfish (mixed species, 12.7% of catch), rockfish (mixed species, 

7.5% of catch), and coho salmon ( Oncorhynchus kisutch , 7.0% of catch). Use 
of the term "mixed species" indicates that the fish had already been 
skinned and filleted at the time the interview was conducted, and that they 
could not be identified to species. The vast majority of fishermen (98.9%) 
planned to eat only the fillets. The most common methods of preparation 
were frying (41.5%), barbecuing (27.3%) and baking (18%). 

Trace metals analysis in raw fish . The mean, range and standard deviation 
of all trace metal measurements are summarized in Table 1. For the purpose 
of mean calculation, the "less than" values are considered as real values. 

For example, if the concentration of As was <0.001 mg/g, the value of 
0.001 mg/g was used for the mean calculation. Also, the numerical values 
of non-detectable results were set to equal zero (ND=0) for the mean 
calcualtion. 

The summary results in Table 1 show that the mean concentration of Hg, Cd, 

Pb, and Se in all of the groups fluctuated within a narrow range, and that 
the mean values were almost comparable within the standard deviation of the 
measurements. The Zn and Cu mean values of the different fish species 
also showed comparable values; however, squid showed clearly higher 
levels of Cu and Zn than did the fish samples. Rock sole showed almost 
twice as much As as did starry flounder (3.3 +/- 0.7 mg/g and 1.5 +/- 
0.7 mg/g, respectively). Pacific cod and walleye pollock, both migratory 
species, showed As values (4.4 +/- 2.9 mg/g and 4.6 +/- 4.1 mg/g, 
respectively) that were comparable to those of the non-migratory rock sole. 

Trace metals analysis in cooked fish . The concentrations of trace metals 
in fried fish (FF) and raw fish (RF) in nine samples are compared in Table 2. 
The concentrations of trace metals in fried fish were normalized to the 
weight of raw fish, and then the ratio of metals in fried fish/raw fish 
were calculated. For the ratio calculations, "less than" or "more than" 


118 
















Table 1. Mean concentration of trace metals in Puget Sound fish muscle. 
Values are in ug/g (ppm) of wet tissue. 


QC 


u 


9 

u 


dO 

< 


c 

K 


4) 

C/) 


QO e 

C w 


U 

4) 

a 

(0 




© 



IN 






IN 



IN 



o 

O 


o 



o 

m 

fA 

o 

• IN 

lA 

• 

IN 

IN 

• 

MM 

mm 

• 

© o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

© 

o 

o 

© 

1 • 

• 

1 

• 

• 

1 

t 

• 

1 

IN © O 

o 

IN © 

o 

o 

lA IN 

o 

o 

IN 

o 


o — 



o 



o 

o 


o 



o 



o 

d 


d 



d 



d 


© o 
o o 

©do 


* 





IN 




IN 




IN 




o 


4A 



© 


On 

© 

o 



© 

© 


A* 

© 

# 


o 

o 


4 


© 

o 

4 


IN 

© 

* 


© 

© 

c 


o 

o 


© 


© 

© 

o 


© 

© 

o 


© 

© 

1 


4 

• 


1 


4 

4 

1 


4 

4 

1 


4 

4 

IN 

© 

o 

o 


IN 

© 

© 

c 

lA 

IN 

© 

© 

IN 

© 

© 

© 

o 





© 




mm 




© 




o 




► 

o 




© 




© 




o 





d 




d 




d 




IN 









IN 




oc 




c 



iA 






© 



A. 

c 




© 


IN 

o 


© 


lA 

lA 

© 


IN 

© 

c 



IA 

• 


c 

o 


4 


c 

© 

4 


© 

© 

4 


© 

© 

c 


o 

o 


© 


© 

© 

© 


© 

© 

© 


© 

© 

1 


• 

4 


1 


4 

4 

1 


4 

4 

1 


4 

4 


© 

o 

o 


mm 

© 

© 

© 

mm 

IN 

© 

© 

IN 

© 

© 

© 

c 





© 




© 




© 




c 





© 




© 




© 




• 





4 




4 




4 




© 





© 




© 




© 




o 





ON 








lA 




© 





lA 




fA 








4 


© 



4 


IN 

mm 

4 



IA 

4 


© 


© 


IN 

o 


© 


lA 

mm 

© 


IN 

© 

© 


IN 

— 

1 


• 

4 


1 


4 

• 

1 


• 

4 

1 


4 

4 

IN 

© 

o 

o 



© 

o 

© 

© 

IN 

© 

© 

mmrn 

© 

© 

o 

IN 





mm 

mm 



IN 








• 





4 




4 




• 




© 





O 




o 




o 





















MM 





IN 




IN 




© 




© 


© 

IN 


© 


00 

iA 

© 



On 

© 



mm 

© 


© 

© 


o 


© 

© 

o 


mm 

© 

o 


© 

© 

4 


o 

© 


4 


© 

© 

4 


© 

© 

• 


© 

© 

© 


© 

© 


© 


o 

© 

o 


© 

© 

o 


o 

© 

1 


• 

4 


1 


4 

4 

1 


4 

4 

1 


4 

4 

© 

© 

c 

© 


© 

© 

o 

o 

A* 

IN 

o 

© 

© 

© 

o 

o 

© 





© 

mm 



© 




© 




o 





o 




o 




© 




© 





© 




© 




o 




• 





4 




4 




• 




o 





o 




o 




o 




© 

















• 





« 




4 




4 




© 


On 

o 


4A 


o 


IA 


On 


© 



A» 

1 


• 

• 


1 


4 

4 

1 


4 

4 

1 


• 

4 

ON 

© 

© 



© 

© 

© 

o 

© 

IN 

CN 

© 


© 

lA 

© 

• 





4 

^m 



• 




• 









IN 




IN 








m 









- 




IN 




• 


m 

o 


• 


mm 


• 




4 


IA 


o 





o 


mm 

© 

© 


mm 


o 



mmrn 

1 


• 

4 


1 


4 

4 

1 


• 


1 


• 

• 

o 

© 

o 

o 


o 

© 

o 

o 


IN 

© 

© 

o 


© 

© 



© 




ON 








IA 





4 




4 




« 




• 




tt 

IN 


tA 

A* 

IN 


© 


mm 


IA 

© 

© 


IA 


< 

1 


4 

• 

1 


• 

• 

1 


4 

4 

1 


4 

4 



© 

mm 

o 

CO 

lA 

mm 

O 

© 

IN 


© 

IN 

© 

IA 

o 


4 




• 

mm 



4 




• 





o 




o 




o 




IN 





On 




IN 




IN 




lA 









IN 




IN 




IN 




41 0 

4 



IN 

4 




• 




• 


•A 

fN 

> ^ 

© 


mm 

o 

o 


fN 

o 

o 



© 

o 


fN 

o 


1 


• 

• 

1 


• 

• 

1 


4 

• 

1 


• 

• 

>s « 

'O 

CO 

o 

o 

On 

© 

o 

© 


IN 

o 

o 


© 

o 

o 

U W 

mm 




mm 

mm 



mm 




fN 




o 

4 




• 




• 




• 





o 




o 




o 




o 





fA 




o 




© 




lA 





• 




© 




4 




• 




w 

o 




© 




ON 




On 




X 

CO 




• 




© 




© 




44 

© 


IA 


Al 


IA 

lA 

© 


lA 


IA 



lA 

^ © 

1 


4 


1 


4 

• 

1 


4 


1 


• 

• 

V ^ 


CO 

© 

mm 

IA 

© 

© 

IN 

o 

IN 

O 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

3 

• 


lA 

CO 

• 

•• 

© 

© 

4 


l/N 

IN 

• 



lA 


© 




© 


© 

lA 

© 


© 

IA 

IA 


IN 



w 

4^ 

•O 

c 

9 

O 


>i 

(0 

</) 




m © 

I • • 

^ 

© 


4) 

© 

2 C ^ D 


© © 


X 

CB 


X 

o 


© 

© 

I • • 

m © ^ 

• IN 


41 

© 

e 


^ 2 


e |M o 


X 

« 


X 

© 


IS 


© 

© 

o 

ir> 


41 

© 

c 


© 
• • 
— 

© 


e iM o 


X 

u 

o 


© 

m 

I 

IN 


IN 


4» 

© 

e 


IN © 
• • 

© 

IN 


X 

U 

o 


o 

C4 

V 


e |M D 


© 

e 


6 D 


119 


26.3-37.3 U6.7-465.3 0.16-0.19 1.1-11.4 0-0.1 3.5-4.8 0.001-0.008 0.25-0.28 0.001-0.012 0.002-0.006 0.001-0.073 











Table 1. Continued 




QC 

X 




a* 


9 




e 

ig 


%/i 




^ o 

*»N» M 

O 

o 


X . 

q0^ 

41 >11^ 

3 


‘^c 6 
z u 




o 

O' 

O 


fn m 

o o 


o 

» • • 

m \C O O 

o 

o 


o 

o 


\r> 

o o 
o o 


o 

I • • 

— ^900 

o 

o 


a>‘ 

c 

o 

• 

o 

I 

o 

o 


o 

o 

« 

o 

I 


m <N 

o o 
o o 

4 • 

o o 


CO 

c 

O lA f»> 

• o o 

o o o 

I • • 

^ fA o O 

o 

o 

• 

o 


<M 

fM 

o 


— o 
o o 


o 

I • • 

fA iA o O 

o 

o 


— o 
o o 


fn O O 

o 

o 


o 

o 

• 

o 

I 

rs» 

o 

o 


o o 
o o 
• • 

fA O © 


o 

<N 


o 

I 

CO 

o 

o 


o o 

• • 

A. c o 


lA 



© 




mm 




CO 




o 



o 




o 




a 




o 


fM 

o 




© 


mm 


© 


fn 

fN 

* 

O 

o 

• 


C 


• 


© 


• 


c 

© 

o 

O 

o 

o 


O 

C 

© 


© 


© 


© 

© 

1 

4 

• 

1 


• 

4 

1 


• 


1 


c 

4 

— © 

o 

o 

<N 


o 

o 


fA 

© 

© 

fN 


o 

o 

o 



o 




o 




© 




o 



o 




© 




© 




4 



» 




• 




4 




o 



o 




o 




© 











fN 




fA 




»A 



fA 








CO 




• 


© 

• 


IA 

4A 

• 


•9 


• 




o 

fA 

mm 

o 


fN 

o 

© 


fA 

© 

•A 


fA 

CO 

1 

# 

• 

1 


4 

• 

1 


« 

• 

1 


• 

• 

^ © 

o 

o 

CO 


o 

o 

CO 

fA 

© 

© 

fA 


fA 

mm 




mm 




fN 




lA 




• 



• 




• 




• 




o 



o 




© 




© 











lA 








mm 



mm 




© 




mm 




o 



o 



9v 

o 


lA 


© 




o 


fA 

o 


mm 

O 

o 


© 


© 




• 

o 

o 

• 


o 

© 

• 


© 


• 



fA 

o 

o 

5 

o 


o 

© 

© 


© 


© 


© 

© 

1 

4 

• 

1 


4 

• 

1 


• 


1 


• 

• 

iA © 

o 

o 

tA 


o 

© 

lA 

fA 

© 

© 

fA 


© 

© 

o 

o 



s 




o 

o 




© 

© 




o 



o 




o 




• 




• 



• 




• 




© 




o 



o 




o 








f>t 











fA 




• 



>o 




r4 




• 




mm 



• 




• 








mm 

9^ 

mm 

fA 


CO 

© 



CO 

© 

mm 


•9 

© 

1 

• 

*■ 

1 


• 

• 

1 


• 

• 

1 


• 

• 

o ^ 


fA 

mm 


fN 

© 

mm 

fA 

fA 

© 

lA 

A* 

#A 

•• 

• 



• 




• 




• 


mm 


rA 



fM 




fA 




mm 



















fS 



fA 








•A 




• 

CO 


• 




• 



© 

• 


© 

mm 

o 

o 

•« 

o 


fN 

© 

o 


© 

© 

© 


© 

mm 

1 

• 

• / 

1 


• 

• 

1 


• 

• 

1 


• 

• 

o ^ 

o 

o 



o 

© 

© 

fA 

© 

© 

© 


© 

o 




d 























© 







IA 








• 




• 



• 




• 




lA 




9^ 


9v 

fA 


o 

mm 

•■4 


© lA 

mm 


fN 


1 

• 

• 

1 


• 

• 

1 


• 

• 

1 


• 

• 



M 

lA 

f*k 

CN 

mm 

lA 

fA 


o 



lA 

© 

• 



• 




• 




• 




o 



o 




o 











CO 




CO 




fN 




mm 



mm 



lA 

mm 




fN 



lA 

• 

© 

•14 

• 



© 

• 



mm 

• 


mm 

© 

o 


o 

o 


mm 

© 

© 


mm 

© 

© 


fN 

© 

1 

• 

• 

1 


• 

• 

1 


• 

• 

1 


• 

• 

lA © 

o 

o 


An 

o 

© 

© 

fA 

© 

© 

mm 

fN 

© © 


o 

lA 

o 


G >C CO >c 

• O CO 

© lA «A 

^ • 

CO «« 


o 

o 


I 

»A 

CO 


fA ^ 
>0 iA 
© lA 


I 

o 


© o 

• • 

€M 

© 


fA 

© 

I 


<•9 


«A CO 

kC 


o 

u 


u 

« 

a. 


fN 



lA 


mm 

mm 


• 



• 


• 

• 


mm 



© 


fN 

© 


© IA 

«i4 


lA CO 

CO 

fN © lA 

mm fN 

© 

1 • 

• 


1 • 

• 

• • • 

1 • 

• 

© © ^ 

IA 


fN fN 

fN 

fN f»> fN © 

^ fN ^ 

mm 

• lA 


41 

• © 

mm 

• IN 

•i4 


lA 


«K 

CO 


CO 

mm 


© 


« 

mm 






oe 

c 

2 


c ^ o 


JZ 

u 


u 

Om 


S e IK D 


o 

o 

H 


4> 

2 e 


IK O 


9 

91 

(/) 


41 

g 

oc elK o 


120 










Table 2. Comparison of trace metals in fried fish (FF) and raw fish (RF) 

samples. Values are in ug/g (ppm) of wet tissue. ND^not detected, 
for mean calculation NO set equal to zero. 



u. 
















a: 



ro 

00 

rx. 

o 

LO 

00 

CM 

O 

cr* 















• 

• 

1 


1 


u. 


■vj 



r-H 


CO 

o 

CM 

CM 

o 





U- 

















ro 




^ _ 

00 

cr* 

VO 


VO 

CM 




rvi 

u. 

• 

• 

• 

• 


• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

1 


1 


o: 

m 

ro 


CO 

r , 

CM 

CO 

CO 

CM 


CO 






















•o 



CO 

CM 

CM 

px. 

rx. 

CO 

CM 

00 

VO 


VO 


Lu 
















Ul. 


rx.. 

ir> 

in 

LO 

CO 

CM 

CM 

LO 

00 


o 


C) 








'— 










U- 










• 






cn 


O 

rx. 


r— 


CO 


r— 

LO 

00 






» 

• 

• 

1 

• 

1 


1 

• 

• 

• 

1 


1 


U- 





CO 






o 





u. 


























CO 

o 




(U 


cvj 


CM 






CO 






LT) 

u_ 

• 

• 

• 

1 

• 

Q 

• 

O 

• 

• 

• 

1 


1 


a: 

o 

o 

o 


o 

Z 

o 

Z 

o 

o 

o 









CM 


to 

CO 

CM 




CO 





CVJ 

r— 

ro 

CM 

CO 

CM 


CM 


CM 


o 


o 


u. 

• 















u. 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

O 

o 

O 

o 

O 

o 

o 


o 














V 


V 


u. 

oc 


to 

00 

VO 

LO 

00 

00 


00 

00 

CO 






• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

9 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

1 


1 


u. 

o 

r— 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

O 

o 

o 

o 





u. 















in 

Li. 


lO 

CO 


On. 

CO 

CM 


CM 

LO 


• 




O' 

• 











1 


1 



CJ 

o 

CM 

Ov 


*“ 


CT* 

CO 

CO 

CO 







in 















rx. 


cy» 

VO 

CT» 

r— 

o 

00 


r— 

VO 

f— 


r— 


Li. 

• 













• 


Li. 


o 

ftmm 

LO 

O 



CO 

CM 

CM 

p— 

<D 


o 

1 















V 

in 















in 















c 

















o 

ro 

lO 

VO 

VO 

fx^ 

VO 

o 

LO 

O 

VO 





• 
















VO 

lO 

CM 


LO 

VO 

VO 

CM 

O 

VO 

LO 

1 


1 

*■> :z 

VO 

rx. 

VO 

VO 

VO 

LO 

VO 

fXx 

VO 

VO 





(O'—' 































4- 

» 

> • 
















1 


lO 

00 

CM 



CO 

00 

o 


LO 




*C 


fO 

CM 

CO 

CO 

CO 


CO 

CM 


CO 

o 




a 

4-> 

0) 

• 

O 

o 

o 

o 

o 

O 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

1 


1 

L. 
















U. 
















0) 

to 

LO 

VO 

o 

CO 

CO 

VO 


CM 



o 




CM 

fx.. 


VO 

VO 



CO 

O 

1 

1 

o 


o 



CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

r-H 

CM 

CM 



LO 


LO 

(0 
















oo 























1. 





.o 











0) 

o 





.Q 









*D 

o 




o> 











c 

r— 

(U 



c 


o> 






•o 



o 

r— 






c 






o 



o 

o 

(O 



•- >» 


•p* 



<D 



a 

.c 



o. 




M- i. 







JT 


(/) 


4- 





O 4- 

o 

L. 



Q 


in 

a 




0) 

u 





4- 




-o 



4- 


>» 

>» 




c or 

c 



0/ 


o 

4- 

4- 

0) 

-o 

V. 

OJ 

4- 



O L. 

o 

L. 




u 





L. 

p^ 

•r— 


• 

in o 

in 

Oj 


i- 

(J 

E 

U 

a 

.O 

o 

ns 

p— 

u 


o 

in 4- 

in 

4^ 


cs 


o 

O 

fO 

«o 

O' 

4-> 

ns 

ns 


• 

(U 0) 

a> 4. 


oo 

o^ 

H- 

o: 

O. 

lO 

lO 

CO 

3 

CL. 

|X 

1/) 

3 Xi 

3 

ns 


121 


< Values or > values set to = values for the mean calculation. 
















•o 

0) 

3 

C 


o 

o 


CM 

(U 



Li_ 



CM 








m 




VO 

CM 

00 


.T) 

'IT' 




r— 

cy» 




• 

• 

• 

1 

, • 

• 

1 

• 

1 

• 

• 

1 


U. 

o 

o 

o 


CM 



CM 



o 



li- 

V| 

VI 













ro 

00 

00 

m 

CM 


CM 

VO 

•er 






o 

o 

CM 

CO 

CM 


CD 

O 

o 




CT 

U. 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 


O 

O 

o 

o 

o 

1 

:r. 

a: 

• 














o 

o 

o 

CD 

CD 

D 

o 

CD 

o 

c> 

CD 










V 








CM 

CM 

ro 


-D 

CM 


CO 


VO 





O 

O 

CM 



CD 





CM 



U- 

o 

o 

o 

1 

o 

O 

1 

o 

1 

o 

O 

1 


u. 

• 

• 

• 


• 

• 


• 


• 

• 




o 

o 

o 


o 

o 


o 


o 

o 




V 

V 




V 






















cxc 

o 

00 


m 

crt 


o 

CM 

r>* 

00 

00 




• 











1 


u. 

VO 

CM 

c::> 

o 

o 

o 



CM 


r— 



U- 















CM 


o 

Lft 

m 

CM 

fx^ 

lO 

CO 


o 




O 

o 

CM 



CO 

o 

o 

o 




•o 

u. 

O 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

1 

o 

o: 

• 














o 

o 

CD 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

CD 

o 

CD 




CM 


00 

00 

CO 

CM 


VO 

00 

cr» 

CO 




r-H 


o 

o 



O 

o 

o 

O 

o 



u. 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

O 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 


u. 















o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

CD 

O 

o 

o 

CD 

CD 

o 














V 


U- 














oi 

c 

o 

m 

ir> 

ir> 

m 

IT) 

rx^ 

LT) 


00 



u. 

m 

IT) 


VO 

VO 

lO 

m 


IT) 


ID 



Li- 


00 

Al 


Al 






CM 




CM 


CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

ro 

CO 


.o 


O 

o 

o 

O 

O 

o 

o 


o 

O 

O 


Q. 

Lt- 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

O 

1 


o: 















o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

CD 






V 


V 










VO 

m 

in 

m 

CO 



o 

o 

o 

o 

o 



CM 

00 


CO 



^4 

CM 

ro 

CO 

CM 

CM 


Li- 

o 

o 

c 

CD 

o 

o 

CD 

o 

o 

CD 

O 

o 


Li. 















o 

o 

o 

CD 

o 

o 

<D 

o 

o 

CD 

CD 

CD 














V 


Ll- 











VO 





VO 

m 



o 


00 


00 

00 



'«s. 












1 


U. 





CM 


CO 

CO 

CO 


CD 



Ul. 















CM 

CM 

lO 


o 


CM 

o 

00 

00 

fx.. 


3 

Ll. 

ro 


ro 

CM 

ro 

CO 

CM 

00 

CM 

IT) 

VO 


O 

OC 

• 

• 










1 



O 

o 

o 

O 

o 

CM 

O 

o 

o 

CD 

CD 




m 

lf> 

VO 

o 

CO 

o 


VO 

00 


VO 

ro 



ro 

VO 



VO 

CM 

VO 

VO 

CO 

r>. 

ir> 

O 


Ll. 














Ll. 

O 

o 

o 

o 

o 

CM 

o 

o 

o 

O 

CD 

CD 



<o 













Ll. 

00 

o 

ro 

o 


O 

o 

o 

o 


00 



oc 

• 

• 










1 



CM 

00 

ro 

00 

m 


o 

VO 

VO 

o 

VO 



Ll. 

CM 













li. 

A\ 

Al 

Al 

Al 











(O 














r< 

LT) 

VO 

tr> 

rx. 


IT) 


LD 

CM 

CO 




O 

o 

o 

o 

o 


o 


o 

o 

o 


CT 


o 

o 

o 

o 

o 


o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

1 

<C 


o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 



Ll. 

• 

• 

• 











OC 

o 

o 

o 

o 

CD 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

CD 




V 

V 

V 

V 











VO 

cy* 

00 




LT) 

VO 

CO 

r.. 


CO 




o 

o 

o 

o 


o 

o 

CD 

o 

o 

CD 



o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

CD 

o 

o 

o 


U. 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 


Li. 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

O 

o 

o 

o 


V 


I 


I 


I 


I 


I 


O 


o 

V 


I 


I 


CM 

o 


o 


I 


I 


CO 

o 

o 

• 

o 

V 


( 

I 


122 


< 0.01 






















values were set to equal values; no ratio was calculated for ND values. The 
results show that the mean concentrations of Ag, Pb, and Zn in fried fish 
were substantially higher than the corresponding values in raw fish. The 
ratios of FF/RF were 10.1 +/- 0.86, 1.8 +/- 1.8, 1.1 +/- 0.95, and 1.5 +/- 
0.8, respectively. The FF/RF ratio for As was 0.8 +/- 0.3 which shows a 
"slight" decrease in the concentration of As as a result of frying. The 
lower values of some metals, such as As and Hg, in fried fish may have 
been due to the presence of volatile metal compounds (methylated forms of 
As and Hg) that were lost from the tissue during frying of the samples. 

Higher values of some metals, such as Ag and Pb, in fried fish should be 
interpreted as indicating no substantial change in concentration. 

Level 1 trace organics analysis . Spiked recovery of hexachlorobutadiene 
in eight species averaged 140 +/- 35%. This result along with the 
higher variability seen in replicate samples, suggests that interference 
may have been significant in low level samples. The precision of instrumental 

2 

analysis was 1.9% RSD across the calibrated range, with an R value of 
0.9999 (for quadratic response function). 

Spiked recovery of hexachlorobenzene in eight species averaged 106 +/- 18%. 

In the five replicate raw fish analyses where HCB was detected, good 
agreement between analyses was seen in three instances, while in two cases 
(0.7 and 0.8 ppb), the replicate level was below the detection limit. In 
actual fish samples, HCB was found above the detection limit in 21 of 67 
samples, with a range and average concentration of 0.5-8.0, and 1.5 ppb, 
respectively (Table 3). The levels seen are in general agreement with 
previous results. 

Spiked recovery of p ,p'-DDE in eight species averaged 93.4 +/- 18%. 

Replicate analysis of seven fish having detectable DDE showed good agreement 
in five cases, with two examples having less than detection limit results 
in one replicate. A closely related compound, o,p'-DDE was used as an 
intra-assay recovery standard, and showed average overall recovery of 
80.6%, with a standard error of 1.8%. DDE was detected in 59 of 67 fish 
samples (Table 3), with a range and average amount of 0,93-15.6, and 3.6 ppb, 
respectively. This range of values corresponds reasonably well with that 
of previous studies. 

The compounds o,p'-DDD and o,p'-DDT are not expected to occur to any 
significant extent in environmental samples, as the commercial DDT used 
and introduced as pollution was largely the p,p' isomer. The o,p'-DDT 
isomer co-elutes with the p,p' isomer of DDT under the GC conditions used 
in this study, so these agents are reported together. However, it is 
reasonable to infer that all of the detected pesticide is contributed from 
the p,p'-DDT. The quality control results for the o,p'-DDD were detected 
in 10 of 67 samples, with a range and average amount of 0.75-5.7, and 
1.8 ppb, respectively. None of these low level "hits" were confirmed in 
the GC/MS aiialysis. Given the method detection limit of approximately 
0.7-1.0 ppb for o,p'-DDD, the few examples of its detection in these 
samples were probably analytical artifacts. 


123 









Table 3. Results of Level 1 trace organics analysis. All results are in ng/g (ppb) wet weight 



124 






























pS 





125 











Spiked recovery of p,p‘-DDD in eight species averaged 79.5% (85.2% with 
the exclusion of one questionable recovery result). Replicate analysis 
of seven fish samples having detectable p,p'-DDD showed good agreement in 
two cases and less than detectable results in replicate samples in five 
cases (all were within 3 ppb of the method detection limit for this 
compound). In actual samples, p,p'-DDD was detected in 35 of 67 cases, 
with a range and average amount of 1.7-7.8 and 2.8 ppb, respectively. 

These levels are consistent with previous results and with the levels of 
p,p'-DDE reported. 

Spiked recovery of p,p'-DDT in eight species of fish averaged 112%. Of 
the eight fish samples run in replicate, this compound was detected in 
only one (non-replicated) instance. In actual samples, p,p'-DDT was 
found in 17 of 67 examples, with a range and average amount of 1.8-7.5 and 
2.9 ppb, respectively. These levels are close to the method detection 
limit, but are consistent with previous reports and with the levels of 
p,p'-DDE and p,p'-DDD seen in these samples. 

Spiked recovery of RGBs was evaluated using a mixture of seven isomerids 
(dichloro- through octachlorobiphenyl). This task was complicated by the 
significant background of environmental RGB compounds in the samples. 
Gorrection for unspiked background yielded an average recovery for eight 
species of fish of 115%. Replicate fish analysis showed agreement that 
averaged 4.4% RSD. Analysis of actual samples gave detectable RGB 
compounds in 67 of 67 cases, with a range and average sum of 13-456 and 
84.3 ppb, respectively. Estimation of total Aroclor level, based on 
these results, gave a range and average of 19-684 and 125 ppb, 
respectively. These results are in agreement with previous reports. 

Level 2 trace organics analysis . GG/MS analysis of Level 2 fish confirmed 
the presence of RGBs and chloronaphthalene (spiked QG compound), but failed 
to confirm the lower level analytes (e.g. hexachlorobenzene, DDT) seen in 
Level 1 analysis. No other chlorinated xenobiotic agents were identified 
from these samples, with an estimated detection threshold of 1-10 ppb. 
Re-analysis of the Level 2 samples by GG/EGD failed to detedt any of the 
following pesticides (above an estimated detection limit of 1 ppb wet 
weight): (alpha, beta, gamma, delta)-BHG, aldrin, heptachlor epoxide, 
gamma-chlordane, dieldrin, endrin, beta-endosulfan, endrin aldehyde, 
endosulfan sulfate, methoxychlor, mirex. A chromatographic peak at the 
correct retention time for heptachlor was observed in several samples in 
amounts equivalent to 1.6-11.5 ppb. None of these results were confirmable 
by mass spectrometry, although the highest samples were above the nominal 
instrument detection limit. It is currently believed that this peak was 
an interferent. The results of these analyses are shown in Table 4. 

Rolynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons were detected in two assays: HRLG/UV 
absorbance/fluorescence and GG/MS. The results for both are presented in 
Table 4. In the present study, these methods should be viewed more as 
complementary than comparable, since fluorescence and absorbance methods 
provided more sensitive detection of the key 5-ring RAH compounds than did 


126 











Table 4. Level 2 polyaromatic hydrocarbon analysis results. All results are In ng/g (ppb) wet 
weight. 



127 






















GC/MS, while the lighter PAH compounds were more sensitively detected by 
6C/MS. Given the greater specificity of the GC/MS analysis, the GC/MS 
result should be relied upon in such cases of disagreement. Recovery for 
PAH compounds was estimated by use of perdeuterated perylene spiked into 
raw fish samples prior to extraction and quantitated in HPLC-fractionated 
fish using GC/MS. The average recovery seen was 70.7%. The levels of PAH 
seen ranged from trace levels (<1 ppb) to 32 ppb; however, few of the 
levels seen could be confirmed by GC/MS. The very low levels of PAH 
seen in tissue are consistent with several previous studies of PAH 
metabolism in fish and with field studies of fish tissue taken in what is 
currently viewed as the most severe example of PAH contamination in 
Puget Sound, i.e. Eagle Harbor (Maiins, 1985). Based on the results 
shown in Table 4 and in previous studies, individual PAH carcinogens in 
edible tissue are clearly expected to fall below 10 ppb, regardless of 
sampling site. 

Trace organics analysis in cooked fish . The raw fish versus cooked fish 
assay results are shown in Table 5. These results are presented in two 
ways--as raw levels and as levels corrected for recovery of the spiked 
o,p'-DDE. The cooked fish samples in several cases would not permit 
quantitation by the standard Level 1 protocol, due to sample or oil 
matrix interference with the second chromatography standard (octachloro- 
naphthalene), so external standard response was used for these samples. 

In general, for all of the compounds considered, reductions in tissue 
levels of 30% or more were seen after cooking. One consistent exception 
to this trend was the Pacific tomcod experiment, where apparent increases 
were seen. These increases were not large (a few ppb) and might be an 
effect of cooking on the fish matrix, or some analytical artifact. 

Without further replication, however, this result should be considered 
anomalous. The other samples display expected reductions as predicted 
by previous studies, and as would be expected for contaminants associated 
with lipid components of tissue that are rendered out of the fish as 
liquid during cooking. The overall conclusion from this experiment is 
that wet tissue analysis of contaminant loading represents worst-case 
contamination, which would decrease upon frying. 

Estimation of human exposure to contaminants . In order to estimate 
contaminant exposure in recreational anglers, one trace metal (arsenic) 
and one class of trace organic (PCBs) were selected for study. Based on 
the data presented in this report, the 5th, 50th and 95th percentile levels 
of these compounds were calculated (ignoring species and site). These 
values represented a global estimate of the concentration of these 
compounds. For arsenic the concentrations were: 5th percentile--! ppm; 
50th percent!le--3 ppm; 95th percent!le--20 ppm. For PCBs the levels 
were: 5th percent!le--24 ppb; 50th percentile--81 ppb; 95th percentile-- 
315 ppb. Based on these values and using estimated consumption rates 
(derived from interview data) dosage rates (ug/person/day) were calculated 
for four commonly caught species. The results are presented in Tables 
6 (arsenic) and 7 (PCBs). 


128 




Table 5. Organic toxicant levels In raw versus cooked (frled)flsh. All results are In ng/g (ppb) 
wet weight. 


O 




O 

fW 


CD U 

a 


fW 

Q 

5 

8 


♦ 

o\ 


i 


S 

A 

e 


cw 


I 


§ 


s 


. n 
^ © 

9^ 

95 

->8 

9Z 

9^ 

s! 
©1 ^ 

95 

99 

-*2 

95 

42 

9S 


95 

-J2 

95 

j2 

92 

* lA 
« • 

n ^ 

95 

44 

99 

o • 

n f% 

^n 

9e 


•4 * 

95 

9^ 

9^ 




58 

4 4 

41 

^5 

V © 

9^ 

9^ 

99 

44 

99 

• 4 

2 ^ 

99 

5^ 

69 

95 

59 

59 

6 ^ 

9^ 

§4 

44 

59 

59 


59 

59 

2-1 

S9 

•5 

Z « 

:-^ 

S4 

2 ^ 


8 S 

ewe 

5^ 



2 ^ 

?4 

S4 

•A 4 

59 


S8 

<w e 


n 4 

59 

* © 

©1 ^ 

2 r. 

§8 

£• 

°s 

4 

8 ? 

2 

fN* ^ 

"5 

n* 

g* 

s- 

8 ^ 

:* 

§5 

^ m 

5^ 

s*« 

^ M 

25 

ew • 

^ n 

n © 
• <w 

cw © 
©1 r% 

•» 4 

o ^ 

•• o 
n d 

w ^ 

z * 

^ A 

n • 

"s 

^ A 

n • 

44 

99 

4^ 

99 

^4 

44 

99 

44 

99 

1 ^ 

9^ 

9^ 

44 

44 

99 

44 

99 

n 4 

59 

44 

99 

44 

99 

8 ^ 

69 

44 

99 

44 

99 


29 


9^ 


« Oi 0« 

O ^ 0» CW« CV ^ K W) 

two r> o AO n r> 


S ?S 28 


*1 %4 


«-( fi-l -i-i ->• S-* -4^ 

59 *9 99 99 92 b9 59 99 59 


^8 dd gg 8S 8S ;S8 ?d 8d 

Vfw “ V ^ " V lOM kT 


5^ 5^ 44 14 44 


«• oiZ aS 

• ■ W «w“ ‘ ‘ - - 


^«p r»o ^ 


cw 1©^ •©• •©•• 


14 52 


-»-• -•-» -Jd dS dd 2d dd dd S® 

99 99 99 95 99 59 99 99 *55 


88 5S S: SS 28 88 88 S8 

82 28 S2 88 SS 23 82 8{l 28 


8 ? 

8 i 

8 s 

88 

88 

88 

** 

88 

8 ^ 
§8 

S 8 
8 = 

88 

88 

; 85 
: S 8 

85 

s 2 

s 2 
©1 ^ 
©« 

©1 © 

^8 

s 2 

fW^ 

©1 

•9 
© 1 © 
^ ©1 

s§ 

~S 

"2 

^ n 

1 **8 

si 


11 



^ 

• T M 


• • «» • CW • fw <w 

lAcw »» 

lb ri e nib ^ cw 


r*. ^.Q 


t4 44 !^ i4 


?- 


U gg 

99 Z-9 99 99 5* 59 59 59 


S9 14 9^ 99 9* 1^ v9 99 


«iT mJmJ 8 ^ mimi •S ^ «i 

S^ oS St SS *^3 

▼ vT 5▼ ▼ *^2 ^ ▼ 


5^ 44 N 44 44 14 s4 44 


go ow nn •• ^o S'• e\io 

!o ^ 0 oo <vcw ooi tf>n 

‘ n K ^ n o 


«4-l 4*4 44 4S 44 £4 44 44 

99 99 99 95 99 59 99 99 


•2 *2 s2 -*? -‘2 

•P n^ lb cw I© ©n ^n 

€w © ©in ^ cw cw © iw ♦ 

^©incum^ncw 


5 


129 


^‘0^^ ' 30 2 M 0 00 <0L 2.49 10.18 3.3; 9 73 <DL 25.14 <DL -i)L 4)L <nL 

^02-C 40.69 0.46 2 90 ^.L <Di. <D.L 4)1. 2.19 <DL 6.92 4)L 4)1. 4)L 2 53 























Table 6. Estimated range of arsenic doses (ug) per person per day of 
consumption. Values are based on observed mean catch and 
upon arsenic values from tissue analysis. Differences among 
soecies are due to different rates of consumption of fish. Fish 
consumption rates are from Table 63 in Landolt et al. (1985). 


Species 

Assumed 

Consumption rate 
gms/person/day 

Estimated aresenic dose (ug) 
Percentile bound 

5th Median 95th 

Sable fish 

30 

30 

90 

600 

Pacific cod 

27 

27 

81 

540 

Squid 

39 

39 

117 

780 

English sole 

n 

n 

33 

220 

Overall 

n 

n 

33 

220 


Table 7. Estimated range of PCB doses (ug) per person per day. Values are 
based on observed mean catch and upon PCB values from tissue 
analysis. Differences among species are due to different rates 
of consumption of fish. Fish consumption rates are from Table 63 
in Landolt et al. (1985). 


Species 

Assumed 

Consumption rate: 
gms/person/day 

Estimated PCB Dose (ug) 
Percentile Bound 

5th Median 95th 

Sable fish 

30 

.7 

2.4 

9.4 

Pacific cod 

27 

.6 

2.2 

8.5 

Squid 

39 

.9 

3.2 

12.0 

English sole 

11 

.3 

.9 

3.5 

Overall 

11 

.3 

.9 

3.5 


130 











Discussion 


The purpose of this two year study was to gain insight into the fishing 
habits and demographic characteristics of urban anglers with the ultimate 
goal of estimating their potential for exposure to contaminants as a 
consequence of consuming recreationally caught fish from Puget Sound. The 
study did not attempt to assess risk, but rather to estimate catch 
and consumption. 

Catch patterns for shoreside and boating anglers were similar, but not 
identical. The species most commonly taken by pier fishermen (squid) was 
not caught at all by boaters. Other species, however, were frequently 
caught by both groups. Both groups primarily caught pelagic fish rather 
than sediment-associated species such as flatfish which have been a source 
of concern because they often bear idiopathic lesions that may result from 
contaminant exposure. The catch rate was higher for boaters. 

Consumption patterns were similar for the two groups in terms of the 
portions of the fish that were consumed and their mode of preparation. 

Daily consumption rates differed between groups, with shoreside anglers 
appearing to have higher consumption rates for most species. 

Demographically, the two groups were similar in many respects, but they 
differed in others. Boaters were much less racially and ethnically 
diverse, and were predominated by Caucasians. On the whole, boaters 
had higher levels of education and were more affluent. 

In general, the concentrations of trace metals detected in this study 
closely resembled levels measured in previous Puget Sound studies (Gahler 
et al., 1982; Stober and Pierson, 1984; Romberg et al., 1984; Tetra Tech 
Inc., 1985). No major differences were noted between trace organics levels 
measured in this study and those of previous Puget Sound studies (Maiins 
et al., 1980; Malins et al., 1982; Gahler et al., 1982; Galvin et al., 

1984). Results of the cooking experiment were consistent with expected 
findings. 

Contaminant exposure estimates, intended to represent exposures conserva¬ 
tively (i.e. to overestimate exposures within the uncertainty in the 
estimation method) were lower than similar estimates conducted nationally 
or in other regions. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration total diet 
study estimated mean daily intake of total dietary arsenic to be 63 ug/day 
(compared to a 50th percentile overall dose of 33 ug/day in the present study). 
FDA estimates of PCB mean daily intake range from 19 ug/day (nationally) 
up to 39-313 ug/day (Great Lakes region). Thiese values compare to the 
worst-case estimate of 12 ug/day in the present study. 

Acknowledgements 

This study was supported by a contract from the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The Contracting Officer's Technical 
Representative from NOAA was Edward R. Long. 


131 




References 


Calambokidis, J. et al. 1984. Chemical Contaminants in Marine Mammals 

From Washington State . NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS OMS 6, 

Rockville,Maryland, 167 pp. 

Dexter, R.M., D.F. Anderson, E.A. Quinlan, L.S. Goldstein, R.M. Strickland, 
S.P. Pavlou, J.R. Clayton, R.M. Kocan and M.L. Landolt. 1981. A 
Summary of Knowledge of Puget Sound Related to Chemical Contaminants . 

NOAA Technical Memorandum OMPA 13, Rockville, Maryland, 435 pp. 

Gahler, A.H., J.M. Cummins, J.N. Blazevich, R.H. Reick, R.L. Arp, C.E. 
Gangmark, S. Popo, and S. Filip. 1982. Chemical contaminants in 
edible, non-salmonid fish and crabs from Commencement Bay, Washington. 
Environmental Services Division Laboratory, U.S. EPA Region 10, 

Seattle, Washington. 

Landolt, M.L., F.R. Hafer, A. Nevissi, G. van Belle, K. VanNess, and 
C. Rockwell. 1985. Potential Toxicant Exposure Among Consumers of 
Recreationally Caught Fish from Urban Embayments of Puget Sound . 

NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS OMA 23, Rockville, Maryland, 104 pp. 

Landolt, M.L. D. Kalman, A. Nevissi, V. van Belle, K. VanNess, and F. 

Hafer. 1987. Potential Toxicant Exposure Among Consumers of 
Recreationally Caught Fish From Urban Embayments of Puget Sound: 

Final Report . NOAA Technical Memorandum, In Press. 

Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, D.W. Brown, A.K. Sparks and H.O. Hodgins. 

1980. Chemical Contaminants and Biological Abnormalities in Central 
and Southern Puget Sound. . NOAA Technical Memorandum OMPA 2, 

Rockville, Maryland, 186 pp. 

Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, D.W. Brown, A.K. Sparks, H.O. Hodgins and 
S.L. Chan. 1982. Chemical Contaminants and Abnommalities in Fish 
and Invertebrates from Puget Sound . NOAA Technical Memorandum OMPA 19, 
Boulder, Colorado, 

Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, D.W. Brown, S L. Chan, M S. Meyers, J.T. Landahl, 
P.G. Proviska, A.J. Friedman, L.D. Rhodes, D.G. Burrows, W.D. Gronlund 
and H.O. Hodgins. 1982. Chemical pollutants in sediments and 
diseases of bottom-dwelling fish in Puget Sound, Washington. Environm. 
Sci. Technol. 18: 705-713. 

Nie, N.H., C.H. Hull, J.G. Jenkins, K. Steinbrunner and D.H. Bent. 1975. 
Statistical package for the social sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill. 

Riley, R.G-., E.A. Crecelius, R.E. Fitzner, B.L. Thomas, G.M. Gurtisen and 
N.S. Bloom. 1983. Organic and Inroganic Toxicants in Sediments and 
Marine Birds from Puget Sound . NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS OMS 1, 
Rockville, Maryland, 125 pp. 


132 


















Romberg, 6.P., S. Pavlou, R. Shoakes, W. Horn, P. Hamilton, T. Gunn, 

B. Muench, J. Vinelli and E. Crecelius. 1984. Toxicant Pretreatment 
Planning Study Technical Report Cl: Evaluation of Toxicant Transport 

Fate. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, Seattle, Washington. 

Stober, Q.J. and K.B. Pierson. 1984. A Review of the Water Quality 

and Marine Resources of Elliott Bay, Seattle, Washington . Municipality 
of Metropolitan Seattle, Seattle, Washington, 57 pp. 

Tetra Tech Inc. 1985. Commencement Bay Nearshore Tideflats Remedial 
Investigation . Final Report to Washington State Dept, of Ecology 
and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Tetra Tech, Inc., 

Bellevue, Washington. 

Toffaletti, J. and J. Savory. 1975. Anal. Chem. 47: 2091. 

United States Food and Drug Administration. 1982. Compliance Program 
Report Findings FY79 Pesticides and Metals in Fish Program (7305.007) , 

National Technical Information Service, Washington, D.C. 


133 

















T , t '>H ♦** ♦>' 


• >, 

i; Ml * 


. *'.ir 


L V ' 


e 


, TT . t 


-T.m; ,:■■ 


h' 


• / 

. I 


jttil 


M'' ,*' ;,:•? ""f 0<7''V^ ''• 



^ sf^ 


St^.' M M'V ' 



•~<r*i 


tut. i 

.7 


'.•?■ '‘V2''S nwft L"' 

'.fi' 


V.lyj'- •■*-'' ' 



’ f 

f* 


. • |\ <3 ^ 

‘ i ^r:■fV 


* * >• • n • '^ . _ ^ . - V- 


s*#> 

Sr** 


! V , .. I r ^ » 


"‘J l>,u r 'IWf''6r>cT 

. i.' - ■ ■-- nli 

•>fi f tA ’ - • 



^ f 


A‘4 


f ■ sf 


4->< 

tk 




7 

V. 


Nri) ^ * 

I i i,;*; 


♦ 4 l • 


Afc' 


STjt, 



Va6^‘ 



«il 




... 



^ *■ 4 ■; 4* * *5 ■ ' 



* . ♦ 


> 

I 

• i 


M . f 




:h. 

w?»t;'j 


.. flip, ly 


N .i 

^ ‘’..y 8^^^* 

■4fr -■ ' • 



n 


m 

a 

^ = 

. i' 

f. 

f 

» Si 



B 


fc’i- ^ 


7,' 


r,* 


ri} I • 

4^.- f 


*, ■ 

I J.I I 




Pt-r 

K r< a- 
“'■■»■- 
‘ r 



i 


I '■>' 


i# 


■* *. ^ 


LT ^ • 4 f « ' 


i( 






I 


,!L..- 



THE PUGET SOUND ESTUARY PROGRAM: MANAGING FOR 
ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS 


Catherine Krueger and John Underwood 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
Office of Puget Sound 
Seattle, Washington 


Introduction 


Puget Sound, located in the northwestern part of the State of 
Washington, is one of the most biologically productive and 
recreationally important estuarine systems in the United 
States. The 2,200 square miles of bays and inlets, and over 
2,000 miles of shoreline, support a rich and diverse commercial 
and sport fishery for fish and shellfish. Economically, the 
Puget Sound basin is a focus for industrial and commercial 
activity, shipping and international commerce. It is a major 
recreational attraction and contributes significantly to 
growing tourism in the area. Puget Sound is more, however, 
it's blue waters, beautiful beaches, and marine life are a 
symbol of the quality of life so important to the people of the 
Pacific Northwest. 

The quality of Puget Sound is a gauge of our success in 
environmental protection. Programs to control and prevent 
water pollution, protect living resources, and minimize risks 
to public health have long been in place in the Puget Sound 
region. Over the past 20-30 years, significant environmental 
improvements have resulted from the control of many 
conventional pollutants, and today, much of the Sound remains 
relatively healthy and capable of supporting a broad range of 
beneficial uses. However, continuing growth and development of 
the region are imposing ever increasing demands upon the 
estuary. There is growing evidence that serious water quality 
problems remain. 

In 1985, a number of agencies and organizations joined forces 
to develop a coordinated strategy for investigating and 
correcting current Puget Sound environmental problems. The 


135 



multi-agency effort was initially known as the Puget Sound 
Initiative, and later as the Puget Sound Estuary Program 
(PSEP). 

The Puget Sound Estuary Program is different than any other 
estuary program currently sponsored by EPA. The primary 
difference is the three-pronged approach being used in 
Washington State. Other estuary programs emphasize 
characterization of estuarine conditions and long-term 
planning, while deferring problem resolution until extensive 
study has been completed. The PSEP program, on the other hand, 
places equal, if not greater, emphasis on taking early action 
to control currently recognized environmental problems. The 
approach encourages enhanced regulatory and enforcement 
activity throughout the life of the program. 

The focus of PSEP resources on issues related to chemical 
contamination is also unique among similar estuary programs 
across the nation. The decision to emphasize chemical concerns 
was based on: (1) consensus among the Puget Sound scientific 
community that the unchecked spread of chemical contamination 
is the most serious problem threatening the Sound today, and 
(2) that limited resources spread thinly over multiple issues 
could purchase only minimal environmental improvement. 

Finally, PSEP is unique because the technically oriented 
federal program is being conducted in concert with a 
comprehensive planning effort initiated at the state level. 

The Puget Sound Water Quality Authority (PSWQA), created by the 
Washington State Legislature in 1985, has been tasked with the 
mission of developing a long-term management plan for the 
Sound. In addition, PSWQA has the responsibility of working 
with state and local agencies to ensure that plan 
recommendations are implemented. This state commitment is 
significant because it frees the federal program to focus 
resources on technical issues, rather than dividing limited 
funds between both research and planning. Moreover, the 
partnership of PSWQA and PSEP provides a vehicle for ensuring 
that the regulatory and research needs identified by PSEP are 
addressed expeditiously at the state and local level. 

This paper describes the Puget Sound Estuary Program; the 
environmental concerns that lead to its creation and the 
strategies that are being developed for addressing them. The 
three main components of PSEP are highlighted: development of 
toxics control programs for the most heavily contaminated parts 
of the Sound; characterization of the Sound's water quality 
problems and resources; and development of management tools and 
a management framework for addressing current pollution 
problems and preserving the future quality of Puget Sound. 


136 


Environmental Concerns That Lead to the Creation of PSEP 


During the 1980's, studies by the National Atmospheric and Oceanic 
Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), the Washington State Department of Ecology (WDOE), 
and others, identified significant biological problems involving toxic 
contaminants at a number of locations in Puget Sound. Significant 
concentrations of priority pollutants and other chemicals, including highly 
toxic and very persistent materials, such as polychlorinated biphenyls 
(PCBs), and heavy metals, such as mercury, arsenic and lead, were identified 
in the sediments of a number of urban and industrial embayments. 

In addition, field surveys identified abnormalities in bottom dwelling 
communities and increased frequencies of diseases (i.e., liver tumors, skin 
lesions) in fish caught in areas with high concentrations of chemicals in 
the sediments. It was suspected that the edible tissue of fish and 
shellfish harvested in certain parts of the Sound might contain potentially 
harmful levels of chemical contaminants. Whether or not the consumption of 
these animals posed a significant threat to human consumers was not known, 
but data indicated that species in higher trophic levels, which fed on Puget 
Sound organisms, were accumulating potentially harmful chemicals in their 
tissues. 

In 1985, these and other concerns about the well-being of the estuary 
prompted the Congress to appropriate funds for use by EPA in initiating the 
Puget Sound Estuary Program. PSEP combines a near-term search for solutions 
to current problems, together with longer-term research and monitoring to 
improve predictive capabilities. The program was created to strengthen and 
better coordinate the collective regulatory, research, and resource 
management efforts of the many agencies having responsibilities in the 
Sound. Currently, a total of sixteen federal, state, and local agencies, 
and several universities and indian tribes participate in the Estuary 
Program. 


Goals and Objectives of PSEP 

The long-term mission of the PSEP is to ensure the maintenance 
of a healthy marine environment that allows maximum beneficial 
use of the Sound and its resources. Collectively, the 
participating agencies seek to achieve a level of 
environmental quality that provides for the protection of 
public health and welfare, assures protection and propagation 
of a balanced, indigenous population of fish, shellfish, and 
wildlife, and allows recreational activities in and on the 


137 




waters of the Sound. As a means of achieving this goal, PSEP 
objectives have been established as follows: 

1. Evaluate available information to define the nature 
and extent of existing and developing water 
quality-related problems in Puget Sound, particularly 
those associated with chemical contamination. 

2. Identify deficiencies in the data available to support 
development of pollution abatement and long-range 
estuary management decisions and develop and implement 
programs to collect and evaluate the additional needed 
information. 

3. Develop and implement appropriate abatement and 
remedial action plans to correct priority Puget Sound 
water quality problems. 

4. Establish long-term water quality management policies 
to ensure protection of public health and the natural 
resources of the estuary. 

5. Improve communication and coordination of water 
quality management activities among federal, state, 
and local agencies and interested and effected 
citizen's groups. 

The selection of PSEP goals and objectives and the 
identification of the program's technical emphases were 
influenced by several assumptions. 

The first assumption guiding PSEP efforts has been that prompt 
action must be taken to address presently known, acute 
environmental problems associated with chemical contamination 
of the Sound. Historically, regulatory agencies with 
responsibilities in the Sound focused most of their attention 
on limiting the discharge of conventional pollutants from large 
facilities. Regulating the discharge of toxic chemicals, and 
establishing linkages between small facilities and 
environmental impacts has been more difficult. These 
difficulties result from the complexity of water quality 
problems and the uncertainties associated with identifying 
contaminant sources. 

The PSEP program operates on the premise that, in order to 
protect the Sound, it will not be possible to wait until all 
cause and effect relationships are established before taking 
action to resolve pollution problems. Chemical contamination 
can result from the discharge of large or small facilities, and 
can be expected wherever industrial or municipal activity is 
concentrated. Because chemical contamination poses a threat 


138 


both to human health and marine life, control of contaminants, 
through whatever means are necessary, has been given high 
priority by the Estuary Program. 

The second assumption which has influenced the design of the 
PSEP program has been the recognition that a comprehensive 
approach to estuarine management should incorporate 
investigation of estuarine processes (e.g., contaminant 
transport and deposition), assessment of current environmental 
conditions (e.g., levels of contaminants in fish tissue), and 
consideration of changes that have occurred in the estuary over 
time and space. Such analyses attempt to establish linkages 
between resource use and environmental impact, and improve our 
ability to predict adverse effects associated with cumulative 
impacts of pollution. The technical findings resulting from 
characterization and problem identification studies enable 
managers to separate perceived from real problems, identify 
environmental problems that may not be readily apparent, and 
identify information needed to further assess problems and 
their causes. 

Finally, PSEP efforts have been influenced by the assumption 
that a coordinated approach and the use of effective management 
tools are essential to the successful, cost effective and 
timely resolution of environmental problems. Existing 
knowledge about the Sound has not always been well 
communicated, nor have ongoing regulatory or research programs 
been well coordinated. It is now recognized that joint efforts 
are required to fully and accurately identify problems, develop 
new and innovative management tools, and coordinate policies 
and priorities. 


PSEP Accomplishments and Results 


Not surprisingly, the studies funded by the Estuary Program can 
be divided into three main program areas: toxics control in 
urban bays, estuary characterization, and improved management. 
In the past two years, substantial progress has been made in 
each area. The approaches taken and recent accomplishments in 
each program area are highlighted below. 

Urban bay toxics control programs 

In addressing chemical contamination in Puget Sound, the first 
priority of PSEP has been to control sources of contamination 
to the most seriously polluted areas. Thus, a major thrust of 
PSEP has been the design and implementation of "action 
programs" for the urban/industrial bays. This geographic focus 
enables concentration of limited resources first in the areas 
which need them most. 


139 



By design, the toxics action programs call for early action 
based on existing information to prevent further chemical 
contamination and environmental degradation. As part of the 
strategy, quantitative relationships derived from analysis of 
existing field data are used to associate contaminant sources 
and biological effects, and "interim source control action 
plans" are developed which recommend specific remedial actions 
(e.g., revised/enhanced/new permits, source monitoring, 
enforcement action) required to control sources of 
contamination. The action plan for each bay includes a 
prioritization of sources, a schedule for action implementation 
and the identification of the agency or individuals who could 
most appropriately implement plan components. 

To assist in the identification of necessary corrective 
actions, and to ensure that remedial activities are carried 
out, special "action teams" of enforcement/compliance 
investigators are assigned to each bay by the state Department 
of Ecology. The function of the Action Team is to canvas high 
priority areas, attempting to identify and control sources of 
contamination. As interim, or first round, remedial actions 
are being implemented, supplemental sampling and source 
analyses are conducted to identify additional problem areas and 
problem sources. Based on the supplemental data, the interim 
plan is revised and a new schedule of actions identified. 

Toxics Action Programs are currently being implemented in 
Elliott Bay and Everett Harbor. These programs are possibly 
the most visible of all PSEP studies. Sampling and source 
control initiated in Elliott Bay and Everett Harbor over the 
past two years have generated much media and public attention. 
Although it is too soon to see dramatic changes in the quality 
of the study areas, current toxics control efforts are already 
reducing the loading of chemical contaminants to the Sound. 
Significant improvements are expected in time. 

For Elliott Bay, an interim source control action plan has been 
developed jointly by EPA and the Washington Department of 
Ecology, with input from an interagency technical work group 
and a citizens advisory committee. The three person Elliott 
Bay Action Team, operating out of Ecology's Northwest Regional 
Office, has been working in Elliott Bay and the Duwamish River 
for approximately one year. To date, the team has conducted 
156 site investigations of known or suspected sources, 
initiated 35 enforcement actions, revised 12 discharge permits 
and issued 5 new permits to previously unpermitted 
discharges. A revised source control action plan is currently 
being developed for Elliott Bay, based on the additional site 
characterization and source data that was generated through a 
sampling program carried out in the summer of 1985. 


140 


The Everett Harbor program was initiated in 1986, approximately 
one year after work began in Elliott Bay. To date, an Everett 
Harbor action team has yet to be assigned. However, 
substantial progress has been made towards characterizing the 
study area and probable sources of toxic contamination. Based 
on existing information, a comprehensive problem Identification 
report has been generated and an interim action plan Is 
currently being developed. 

Estuary characterization and problem identification 

The PSEP approach to Improving understanding of the overall 
estuarine system builds upon previous work undertaken by EPA, 
NOAA, the Department of Ecology, and the University of 
Washington. The approach involves synthesis and analysis of 
spatial and temporal trends using historic and current data on 
pollutant loads, water and sediment quality, and living 
resources. In addition, intensive field and literature surveys 
are used to evaluate current conditions. 

An evaluation of past and current estuary characterization 
efforts revealed several areas in which additional work was 
needed. In response, PSEP funded characterization and problem 
Identification studies have addressed a broad range of topics, 
including investigations of chemical uptake in marine 
organisms, trends in chemical and nutrient loadings and related 
water quality impacts, routes of contaminant transport and 
deposition, and evaluation of changes in living resource 
distribution and abundance. Although many of the PSEP 
characterization studies have yet to be completed, significant 
products have already resulted. Two of the most noteworthy are 
the Puget Sound Environmental Atlas, and a series of pollutant 
loading reports which detail the current state of knowledge 
about the loading of various contaminants to the Sound. 

The Environmental Atlas, which consists of a series of 
approximately 500 maps with overlays and accompanying 
narrative, is expected to provide a common reference for 
agencies focusing action on preventing and/or solving Puget 
Sound environmental problems. Based on the consensus of the 
local scientific community, the information presented In the 
Atlas includes the most reliable information available about 
pollution sources, resource distribution, and current 
environmental conditions. 

The Puget Sound Pollutant Loading study focused on 
identification of historic and recent data about the loading of 
contaminants, from both point and nonpoint sources, to the 
estuary. The study provides a basis for using the limited 
information which now exists, and for determining where 


141 


additional data collection is needed to quantify specific 
loadings. 

Improved management 

In addition to developing an improved technical understanding 
of the system, an objective of PSEP has been to support the 
improvement of the overall management of the estuary. 
Specifically, the program has attempted to develop consistency 
between agencies, mutual support for common goals and the most 
efficient use of limited financial resources. In the past two 
years, PSEP efforts to improve estuary management have focused 
on a variety of issues. Of particular significance has been 
progress made in the area of interagency coordination and 
cooperation. 

The majority of funding for PSEP supported studies comes from 
EPA. However, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Department 
of Ecology, Seattle Metro, the City of Seattle, and other 
agencies have also contributed. Other agencies and individuals 
are encouraged to participate in PSEP from the planning phase 
through program implementation. To accommodate this 
involvement, a formal management structure has been developed. 
This structure is significant because it represents the first 
time in recent years that a forum has existed for regular 
interagency coordination and cooperation on issues concerning 
Puget Sound. 

PSEP is administered on a day to day basis by staff in EPA's 
Office of Puget Sound. The program receives management 
direction from an Implementation Committee (IC). The IC, a 
group of senior-level administrators representing each of the 
participating agencies, is co-chaired by representatives of 
EPA, the Department of Ecology, and the Puget Sound Water 
Quality Authority. The Committee meets bimonthly to discuss 
water quality problems, to outline and evaluate strategies for 
dealing with problems, and to identify areas in which 
interagency coordination can enhance independent efforts. 

The IC receives scientific and technical advice from the 
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), a committee comprised of 
members of the scientific community involved in Puget Sound 
research. The TAC provides recommendations concerning research 
priorities and assists in the design and oversight of PSEP 
funded scientific studies. Both the TAC and the Implementation 
Committee are instrumental in developing and approving annual 
work plans for the estuary program. 

Citizens are involved in PSEP through participation at public 
meetings and representation on citizens advisory committees 
(CAC). CACs, composed of representatives of environmental and 


142 


user groups are currently functioning for each of the PSEP 
Urban Bay Toxics Action Programs. It is recognized that 
without citizen support for the program, critical political, 
legislative and funding support would not be forthcoming. 

All participating agencies are considered partners in PSEP. 
However, the EPA and the Puget Sound Water Quality Authority 
are developing a special relationship. The Authority, created 
by the Governor of Washington State in 1985, has been assigned 
the mission of developing a comprehensive management plan for 
Puget Sound. This plan provides a framework for the studies 
being conducted by PSEP. To ensure that resources are not 
wasted through duplication of effort, and that studies provide 
information that can benefit both programs, representatives of 
PSEP and PSWQA have signed a formal memorandum of agreement. 

The agreement binds both PSEP and PSWQA to coordinating and 
cooperating on issues involving the management of Puget Sound. 
As a result of the agreement, PSEP and PSWQA are sponsoring a 
number of jointly funded studies, including the Puget Sound 
Environmental Atlas and the Puget Sound Monitoring Program. 

In addition to improved interagency coordination, a number of 
PSEP efforts have resulted in significant progress in the area 
of improved interagency consistency. The most visible of these 
efforts have addressed standardization of protocols, 
development of comprehensive environmental monitoring programs, 
and techniques for evaluating sediment contamination. 

Developed jointly with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, the 
PSEP Protocols Manual is nearing completion. This manual 
details recommended techniques for sampling and analysis of 
physical, chemical, and biological variables in Puget Sound. A 
number of protocols have already been issued, and several are 
undergoing final technical review. It is anticipated that use 
of consistent protocols by all agencies will result in the 
generation of data that is not only of consistently high 
quality, but is also exchangeable and comparable. 

In cooperation with PSWQA, PSEP is developing an integrated 
monitoring program for Puget Sound. The program, which builds 
on and augments existing monitoring programs at the federal, 
state, and local level, represents an attempt to begin 
evaluating conditions and trends in Puget Sound in a 
coordinated and consistent manner. The comprehensive 
monitoring program, which is currently in draft form, will 
include ambient monitoring of physical, chemical, and 
biological conditions, monitoring conducted in conjunction with 
permitted discharges, and intensive surveys. 

PSEP efforts to develop tools for evaluating the extent and 
significance of sediment contamination in the Sound began in 


143 


1985. The results of this study are important because they 
address one of the most complex environmental regulatory 
problems facing Puget Sound managers today. The first phase of 
the PSEP sediment quality study is complete, although it is 
apparent that additional work will be required. PSEP efforts 
to date have focused on identification and evaluation of 
techniques that can be used in developing sediment quality 
values (SQYs). SQVs are chemical specific numerical values 
which will be used by EPA and other agencies in identifying and 
managing contaminated sediments in Puget Sound. 

In addition to those listed above, other important studies have 
been sponsored by the Estuary Program. A complete list of 
these studies is included in Table 1. 


Puget Sound Estuary Program Future 

By the end of 1987, PSEP efforts will have resulted in 
substantial progress toward improved management of Puget 
Sound. A framework will exist to ensure ongoing interagency 
coordination and cooperation, and the approach developed for 
the Urban Bay Action Program will provide the basis for future 
toxics control activity. In addition, the completion of a 
limited series of characterization studies will enable managers 
to begin the process of separating real from perceived 
environmental problems. 

Although progress will have been made, it is anticipated that 
the Estuary Program will receive only two or three more years 
of federal funding beyond 1987. Much of this support will be 
needed to complete already initiated studies. Supplemental 
funding for additional years will be required to address the 
new environmental questions which are currently emerging. 

It would be satisfying for program managers to see all PSEP 
efforts through to completion. However, the realistic scope of 
PSEP is limited to developing the basis for additional research 
and regulatory actions. When federal funds are no longer 
available, it will be the responsibility of the State to 
maintain the integrity of the program. To ensure that the 
transition proceeds smoothly, PSEP will strive to achieve a 
number of milestones in the coming three years. These 
milestones include the following: 

Urban bay toxics control programs 

- Complete final or interim action plans for Elliott Bay, 
Everett Harbor, Shilshole Bay, Budd Inlet, Sinclair Inlet. 


144 



Work with the Department of Ecology to establish Action 
Teams in each of the Bays. 

Conduct field surveys as necessary in each bay to collect 
information for source identification/prioritization. 

Compete several pilot projects demonstrating use of 
remedial action technologies in addressing in-place 
sediment contamination. 

Characterization and problem identification 

Develop a process for routine updating of Puget Sound 
Environmental Atlas 

Characterize the nature and extent of chemical 
contamination in Puget Sound in areas outside of urban and 
industrial embayments. 

Conduct additional studies to evaluate the significance of 
emerging environmental problems (e.g., chemical 
contamination of the sea surface microlayer). 

Improved management 

Identify environmentally protective criteria that can be 
used in identifying, managing, and preventing sediment 
contamination. 

Develop addition protocols as needed and a process for 
routine updating of the Puget Sound Protocols Manual. 

Support the implementation of the comprehensive monitoring 
program for the Sound. 

By the end of 1989, the year that EPA funding is expected to 
expire, a solid basis will have been developed for effective 
regulation and control of chemical pollution in Puget Sound. 

It is important to note, however, that the legacy of PSEP will 
only be a basis for further action, and that this framework 
will primarily address toxics concerns. Continued commitment 
on the part of the State will ensure that PSEP recommendations 
are implemented. Additional funds, from both federal and state 
sources, will be required to respond to the many non-toxics 
problems influencing the health of Puget Sound. 


145 


Table 1. PSEP Accomplishments to Date 


Urban Bay Toxics Control Programs 

Elliott Bay 

- Data Summaries and Problem Identification Report 

- Review of Existing Plans and Activities Report 

- Interim Action Plan 

- Sampling Program 

- Action Team 

Everett Harbor 

- Data Summaries and Problem Identification Report 

- Review of Existing Plans and Activities Report 

- Sampling Program 

Characterization and Problem Identification 


Puget Sound Environmental Atlas 

Pollutant Loading Investigation 

Contaminant Transport Study 

Chemical Contamination of Edible Seaweeds 

Symposium Co-Sponsor, Toxic Chemicals in Aquatic Environments 
and Biological Effects 

Improved Management 

Implementation Committee and Technical Advisory Committee 

Puget Sound Protocols Manual 

Human Health Risk Assessment Manual 

Evaluation of Techniques for Establishing Sediment Criteria 
Puget Sound Data Management Evaluation 
Chemicals of Concern Matrix 

Development of Standard Reference Material for Puget Sound 
Sediments 


146 







Table 1. PSEP Accomplishments to Date 


Public Education 

- Seattle Aquarium Puget Sound Exhibit 

- Pacific Science Center Puget Sound Exhibit 

- Adopt-A-Beach Volunteer Program 

- Puget Sound Notes newsletter 

Puget Sound Environmental Management Report 


147 




Table 2. Currently Funded PSEP Studies 


Urban Bay Toxics Control Programs 

Elliott Bay Toxics Action Program 
Everett Harbor Toxics Action Program 
Shilshole Bay/Lake Union Investigation 

Characterization and Problem Identification 

Changes in Nutrient Loadings and Water Quality Over Time 

Distribution and Abundance of Puget Sound Crab 

Chemical and Bacterial Contamination in Puget Sound Shellfish 

Chemical Contamination in Blackmouth Salmon 

Human Health Risks Associated with Consumption of Puget Sound 
Fish, Shellfish, and Seaweed 

Survey of Toxics Related Problems Outside of Urban Bays 

Improved Management 

Puget Sound Protocol Development 

Development and Refinement of Bioassay Techniques 

Development of Puget Sound Monitoring Program 

Development of Puget Sound Sediment Criteria 

Computer Bibliography of Puget Sound Documents 

Public Education 

- Adopt-A-Beach Volunteer Program 

- Puget Sound Notes newsletter 


148 







THE PLAN FOR PUGET SOUND'S FUTURE 


Kirvil Skinnarland, 

Kathy Fletcher, and 
John Dohnnann 

Puget Sound Water Quality Authority 
Seattle, Washington 


Introduction 

The story of Puget Sound is similar to that of other bays and estuaries around the 
United States. It is a unique natural resource that provides an economic and 
recreational focal point for the residents that inhabit its shores and watershed. 

The Sound supports significant international shipping activity and is noted for its 
fish and shellfish resources, its ecological, scientific, and recreational values, and 
its beauty. Increases in the number of people and their related activities have led 
to changes in its environment and increasing competition for use of its natural 
resources. Problems of pollution and loss of valuable resources have led to public 
outcry and demand for governmental action. 

Thus far, this could be the story of many estuaries in the nation. But in Puget 
Sound, the response on the part of government has been, perhaps, more timely 
than in other regions of this country. Although the symptoms were alarming, the 
estuary had not reached the same state of degradation found in other water bodies 
such as San Francisco or Chesapeake Bay. In Puget Sound, governmental 
intervention was timely and decisive. Whether the outcome will be different is the 
part of the story that remains to be written. 

Establishment of the Puget Sound Water Quality Authority 

Many agencies in the state of Washington are active in addressing water quality 
issues. TTiese governmental entities include literally hundreds of public bodies: 
federal and state agencies; county and city governments; tribal nations; port, 
water, diking, sewer, and other special purpose districts. This fragmentation of 
responsibility is a challenge to any effort to manage and protect Puget Sound. In 
1984 Region 10 of EPA and the state Department of Ecology took the lead by 
forming the Puget Sound Action Program (subsequently renamed the Puget Sound 
Estuary Program). Along with the other state and federal agencies that joined this 
endeavor, EPA and Ecology made progress in defining the problems in Puget Sound 
and increasing coordination among the various programs attempting to address 
them. 


149 




Following on this progress, the newly-elected governor, many legislators, and 
environmental groups felt that a more formal and comprehensive governmental 
response was necessary to address increasingly alarming reports regarding the 
health of Puget Sound. In May of 1985 the Washington State Legislature 
transformed the advisory Puget Sound Water Quality Authority into a full-fledged 
agency charged with the mission of developing and overseeing the implementation 
of a comprehensive plan for the cleanup and management of Puget Sound. This 
plan is to be carried out by existing state and local agencies. The Authority is 
governed by a seven-member board appointed by the governor (including one full¬ 
time chair), joined by two non-voting members-the heads of the state Departments 
of Ecology and Natural Resources. 

Planning Process 

As a new agency, the Puget Sound Water Quality Authority faced the tasks of 
establishing itself as a focal point for Puget Sound activities and developing a 
planning program that could build the consensus needed for a successful plan. The 
planning effort was two-pronged. The Authority’s technical staff focused on 
compiling and analyzing available information on Puget Sound’s problems; the public 
outreach staff worked on newsletters, mailing lists, brochures, slide shows, media 
relations, and getting out to the 12 counties surrounding the Sound to listen to 
people’s concerns about water quality. An advisory committee and panel of 
scientists were formed to assist the Authority in developing the plan. 

The conclusions from the technical analyses were that the primary problems in 
Puget Sound result from (1) contamination of bottom sediments by organic and 
inorganic chemicals, and (2) bacterial pollution. The sources of these contaminants 
are many and varied. Major sources include industrial and municipal discharges; 
runoff from highways, urban, and agricultural areas; dredging and spoils disposal; 
failing septic systems; forestry practices; spills; combined sewer overflows (CSOs); 
and recreational boating. 

Documented effects include fin erosion and liver tumors in bottom-dwelling fish in 
urban bays (Malins et al., 1982); closure of several prime commercial shellfish beds 
due to bacterial pollution (PSWQA, 1986); changes in structure and abundances in 
benthic communities (Tetra Tech, 1985); and elevated levels of PCBs and some 
metals in certain species of fish, shellfish, birds, and marine mammals (Dexter et 
al., 1981). The bottom sediments, particularly in urbanized areas, appear to be 
highly toxic to some organisms (Long, 1985, PSWQA, 1986). As a result of the 
presence of highly contaminated bottom sediments. Commencement Bay is a 
designated Superfund site, and Eagle Harbor is proposed for such designation. 

More recently, laboratory studies of the sea surface microlayer (an extremely thin 
layer of mainly organic substances that float on the surface) have shown high 
toxicity to fish eggs and oyster larvae (Hardy and Kiesser, 1986). In addition to 
problems of contamination, Puget Sound has lost over half of its wetlands to 
human activity (PSWQA, 1986). 

There also have been improvements in the Sound over the years with changes in 
land use, improvements in technology, and tightening of regulations. For example, 
secondary treatment of pulp mill effluents has largely reversed severe degradation 


150 



and resource losses that had occurred in some parts of the Sound. The deposition 
of some restricted chemicals-such as DDT and PCBs-has slowed in recent years 
(Dexter et al., 1985). At the same time, increased population and more intense 
land uses have tended to be accompanied by additional water pollution (PSWQA, 
1986). It is difficult to predict what effect a population increase of 30 percent by 
the year 2000 will have on the Sound. 

One of the major conclusions of the technical analyses was that there are still 
large gaps in our understanding of the Sound and how it is affected by 
contamination. Consequently, it is difficult to precisely determine the status of 
Puget Sound’s resources and predict future trends. Although the sources are 
known, the relative contributions from different sources are not well understood. 

And, once pollutants have entered the Sound, only limited knowledge exists as to 
their fates and effects. Many of the existing studies of biological effects show 
correlations rather than cause-and-effect relationships. Existing monitoring 
programs are limited in scope and not coordinated, thus making it difficult to 
obtain sufficient data for a good understanding of environmental conditions and 
pollutant loadings. 

In addition to analyzing the resource problems, PSWQA studied the effectiveness of 
current programs to control the known sources of contamination. Point sources of 
pollution are generally regulated at the state and federal levels, with the NPDES 
permit system being the primary control mechanism. Examination of this program 
revealed major weaknesses in all aspects of the point source control program, 
including major gaps in the control of toxicants and weak inspection, enforcement, 
and monitoring efforts. Programs at the state and local levels addressing nonpoint 
source pollution are fragmented, and many sources are uncontrolled. Although 
wetland preservation is an issue that has received much attention in recent years, 
many Puget Sound wetlands and other habitats are still threatened by development. 
Almost all government programs are underfunded, which in many cases means that 
current federal and state legislative mandates for resource protection are not being 
carried out. Although there are numerous laws, programs, and agencies addressing 
Puget Sound issues, the programs lack coordination and are not comprehensive. 

Many important issues are simply not being adequately addressed. Few overlaps in 
programs were found. 

Along with the technical analyses, the Author!^ conducted a public opinion survey 
to assess the knowledge and attitudes of Washington State residents about water 
quality issues. In general, there is high recognition of water quality problems and 
support for increased resource protection. Six out of ten people surveyed believe 
that Puget Sound has a water quality problem. However, many residents believe 
that industry is the major source of pollution; there is less recognition of problems 
caused by other sources such as farm practices or urban stormwater runoff. 

The results of the Authority’s technical analyses were published in a series of nine 
issue papers and a State of the Sound Report. Following public review and 
comment on the issue papers, the Authority prepared and issued the draft Puget 
Sound Water Quality Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). 
Public hearings were held in all twelve Puget Sound counties on the combined 
draft plan and EIS, and several hundred written comments were received. Based 


151 


on the results of this public review, the Authority developed a revised plan 
proposal and issued the final EIS. In December of 1986, the Authority unanimously 
adopted the final plan. 

The 1987 Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan 

The purpose of this plan is to protect and enhance three resources: the Sound’s 
water and sediment quality; its fish and shellfish; and its wetlands. The plan is 
premised on a long-term goal to prevent any increase in the introduction of 
pollutants to the Sound and its watersheds, and to reduce and ultimately eliminate 
harm from the entry of pollutants to the waters, sediments, and shorelines of 
Puget Sound. This emphasis on prevention recognizes the simple truth that it will 
cost more to clean up pollution later than to prevent it now. Each of the source 
control programs in the plan contains specific goals and actions to prevent 
additional pollution. 

Recognizing that water pollution crosses jurisdictional lines, the plan establishes a 
framework based on a partnership between state and local agencies, each having a 
defined set of responsibilities in different areas. The plan also recognizes and 
includes actions by tribes, the private sector, and citizens, and it relies on the 
federal government to play an important role as well. 

An important emphasis of the plan is effective implementation of existing 
governmental programs, particularly the provision of adequate staff and funding for 
those programs, flie plan prescribes expansion of existing programs and the 
establishment of new programs to address designated problems. It uses existing 
agencies rather than calling for the creation of new ones. 

This plan is comprehensive: it addresses the major sources of water and sediment 
quality degradation and wetland loss; it generally applies to all of the Puget Sound 
basin; and it employs a range of solutions-regulato^, educational, and policy. At 
the same time, it calls for programs targeted to particular geographic locations. 

Special emphasis is given to the control of toxicants discharged into Puget Sound 
by strengthening existing regulation of industrial and municipal discharges. This is 
accomplished through controlling toxicants in permits; adopting sediment quality 
criteria; increasing frequency of inspections (including unannounced inspections); 
aggressively seeking out unpermitted discharges; requiring more complete discharge 
monitoring and use of certified laboratories; and implementing pretreatment 
requirements. Increased discharge permit fees are proposed to fund a significant 
portion of the improvements in the program. 

The generation and spread of contaminated sediments are controlled through the 
programs for stormwater, dredging and disposal, and by regulation of point sources. 
The program for contaminated sediments and dredging includes goals for sediment 
quality and dredging and disposal programs. It requires standards for dredged 
material disposal and a feasibility study of multi-user disposal sites for 
contaminated sediments. And building on a major initiative of the state 
Department of Ecology and EPA, the plan calls for an accelerated program to 
identify and investigate contaminated sediment sites. 


152 



The plan requires stormwater programs in all cities and other urbanized areas in 
the Puget Sound basin phased in over the next 13 years. Local stormwater 
programs are to emphasize source controls and best management practices rather 
than end-of-pipe treatment. 

Control of bacterial poPution from septic systems, farm animals, and recreational 
boating is addressed in the nonpoint program, with special attention given to 
commercial and recreational shellfish areas. The plan requires locally determined 
and implemented nonpoint pollution control action plans in priority watersheds. 
Local efforts are augmented by several state government programs-a boaters task 
force to tackle pollution problems from boats; and several initiatives relating to 
on-site sewage treatment, including a proposal to ensure that systems are 
functioning properly at the time of property sale. 

The protection of Puget Sound wetlands is accomplished by a state level program 
for identification and acquisition of significant wetland habitats. This program is 
augmented by enhancement of local regulatory programs for wetland protection. 

In recognition of the considerable scientific uncertainty that exists about the 
effects of pollution in Puget Sound, the plan also includes programs for research 
and monitoring of the health of the Sound. A comprehensive monitoring program 
is necessary to guide actions over the long term including modification of the plan 
and development of new programs. 

Because the responsibility for protecting Puget Sound involves action by 
individuals, businesses, and all levels of government, education is a key feature of 
the plan. TTie plan contains both education requirements in specific programs and 
an overall education and public involvement program. 

Inherent in the plan is a strong sense of priorities. Decisions on priorities are 
reflected by the Authority’s decision to include some issues and programs in the 
plan and not others. The scheduling of target dates for completion of certain 
programs also reflects decisions on priorities. 

The price tag for this plan is estimated to be approximately $20 million per year 
for agency operating costs. Costs associated with public capital improvement 
programs and private sector compliance with the plan’s provisions would be in 
addition to this amount. One primary funding source for plan implementation will 
be the state’s Water Quality Account, a fund established by the legislature in 1986 
by adding an eight cent per pack tax on cigarettes. 

State and local agencies will be the primary implementers of the plan. Through 
1991, the Authority will provide continuing oversight and technical assistance and 
will work to ensure compliance. The Authority is required to revise and update 
the plan by January 1,1989, and January 1,1991. 

The adoption of the Puget Sound Management Plan is a major milestone for the 
Sound. Tlie plan represents the first comprehensive effort to address the Sound’s 
water quality problems and develop ways to solve them. The problems were not 
created overnight, and they won’t be solved overnight. The plan establishes a 


153 


program for managing the Puget Sound over the long term; a program that will 
ensure that Puget Sound is protected for the enjoyment and benefit of future 
generations. 


Appendix 

Dexter, R.N., D.E. Anderson, E.A. Quinlan, L.S. Goldstein, R.M. Strickland, S.P. 
Pavlou, J.R. Clayton, Jr., R.M. Kocan, and M. Landolt. 1981. A Summary of 
Knowledge of Puget Sound Related to Chemical Contaminants. NOAA Technical 
Memorandum OMPA-13. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 
Boulder, Colorado. 435pp. 

Dexter, R.N., L.S. Goldstein, P.M. Chapman, and E.A. Quinlan. 1985. Temporal 
Trends in Selected Environmental Parameters Monitored in Puget Sound. NOAA 
Technical Memorandum NOS OMA-19. National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration. Rockville, Maryland. 166pp. 

Hardy, J.T., and S.L. Kiesser. 1986. Toxic Chemicals in Aquatic Surface 
Microlayers: Sampling, Analysis, and Biological Effects. Battelle/Marine Research 
Laboratory, Sequim, Washington. 

Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, D.W. Brown, A.K. Sparks, and H.O. Hodgins. 1982. 
Chemical Contaminants and Biological Abnormalities in Central and Southern Puget 
Sound. NOAA Technical Memorandum OMPA-2. National Oceanic and Atmos¬ 
pheric Administration, Boulder, Colorado. 293pp. 

Puget Sound Water Quality Authority. 1986. The State of the Sound 1986. Puget 
Sound Water Quality Authority. Seattle, Washington. 120pp. 

Tetra Tech, Inc. 1985. Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tideflats Remedial 
Investigation, Final Report. State of Washington, Department of Ecology and U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency. Bellevue, Washington. 92pp. 


154 


POLLpUTION management in WASHINGTON STATE 


Andrea Beatty Riniker 
Department of Ecology 
State of Washington 


The last two years have brought profound changes in Washington State's 
management approach to fighting water pollution. 

In those two short years we have developed a plan to clean up Puget Sound. 
We passed several landmark pieces of pollution fighting legislation and 
approved a major new tax plan which will raise $575 million between now 
and the year 2000 for improving and protecting our water. 

Strong leadership from Gov. Booth Gardner and the Legislature, combined 
with other factors, have created not only a tide for change in the way we 
fight pollution, but also high expectations for results. 

Those expectations are an important element for us to consider in the 
months ahead as we continue charting our course to clean up Puget Sound. 
It is important that we develop realistic plans and realistic 
expectations. 

Puget Sound will not be cleaned up in one year or two, and we must make 
sure members of the public understand that. Otherwise they may become 
disappointed with our progress, disenchanted with our program and we could 
risk losing the important momentum we have gained in improving and 
protecting the resources of Puget Sound and the rest of the state. 

We were fortunate to turn our attention to Puget Sound at a relatively 
early time, certainly before the situation became desperate. There were a 
number of factors which helped our state leaders make this commitment. 

One factor is the strong environmental ethic in the state. The environ¬ 
ment is deeply rooted in the economy and lifestyle of the state. One 
recent public opinion survey suggested that 64 percent of the people favor 
environmental protection, even, in some cases, over economic development. 


155 


In addition to this strong environmental ethic, however, we had other 
significant developments. Puget Sound cleanup became a major element in 
our 1984 gubernatorial election. Scientific studies, which you have heard 
about today, begged for action on the sound. The media joined the chorus 
for pollution fighting and we even had a few highly publicized cases of 
whale deaths which some people attributed to pollution. 

All this helped set the stage for the 1985 session of the Legislature 
which produced a number of major management initiatives. 

You have already heard about the legislation creating the Puget Sound 
Water Quality Authority and its mandate to develop a cleanup plan. 

But there were three other significant bills passed. One directed Wash¬ 
ington communities to achieve the greatest reasonable reduction in com¬ 
bined sewer overflows in the shortest reasonable time. 

Another bill allowed local government the authority to raise money to 
solve pollution problems in waters where shellfish are produced. 

And still another bill focused on groundwater. It gave us the authority 
to begin protecting not only groundwater quality, but also groundwater 
quantity. 

But we weren't through. A year ago the Legislature came back into session 
and passed a cigarette tax which will raise $575 million between now and 
the year 2000. 

Those tax revenues, combined with federal and local funds, will give us an 
additional $1.7 billion to fight pollution during the next 13 years. 

But while that is a lot of money, we estimate our costs for secondary 
treatment, CSO reduction and protection of groundwater and lakes will cost 
about $3 billion. So one of the key management decisions still on the 
table is how we will allocate our limited resources. 

Even before the authority began its work, the department was taking steps 
to more effectively combat pollution. There was a perception the 
Department of Ecology just wasn't doing the job on enforcement. Many felt 
we weren't being rigorous enough in bringing industry and municipalities 
into compliance with our environmental laws. 

We took steps to change that. We increased emphasis upon taking timely 
and appropriate enforcement action. In addition, we sought, and the 
Legislature approved, measures to strengthen our enforcement efforts. 

More types of violations were made subject to civil penalties and the 
maximum amount of penalties was increased from $5,000 per violation per 
day to $10,000. 


156 


There has been an 82 percent increase in the total number of enforcement 
actions taken from fiscal year 1983 to fiscal year 1987 and a 1,305 
percent increase in the dollar amount of water quality penalty 
assessments. 

One of the major management challenges within the Department of Ecology 
has been the demand to move beyond conventional pollution controls to the 
control of toxics. 

Considering we weren't even at the point where we wanted to be in 
controlling conventional pollutants, this was an enormous shift in 
management emphasis. 

The shift was difficult because so little was known about this field. 
There were no EPA standards or industrial and chemical standards, so we 
did not have clear roadmaps to point the way. 

Our work on Commencement Bay in Puget Sound started us on the road to a 
toxic source control program and laid the groundwork for where we go in 
other urban bays. 

The Commencement Bay work was a first step toward development of sediment 
criteria and a cornerstone for development of analytical techniques for 
measuring low levels of chemicals in the sediment. 

Commencement Bay also was the first area where extensive human health 
assessment techniques were used and our work there taught us 
more about linking contaminants in the sediment to sources. 

Today we are developing a toxics control strategy which will be based more 
on biological effects of discharges rather than on standards for each 
chemical in the discharges. By looking at the effects of the discharge as 
a whole, we will be able to take into account the cumulative and combined 
affects of many chemicals. 

Another key management thrust will be to beef up our permit and inspection 
efforts. These programs have been woefully underfunded in the past. 

While the Legislature has not yet approved a final plan, the authority's 
plan sets some goals for the enforcement and permit programs. 

We hope to inspect every permitted facility once a year. And we want to 
have three inspection visits a year to every major discharger. 

Currently our inspection efforts are very inadequate. We have 1,100 
permitees but are inspecting only 200. 

The permit process also is behind. We have an enormous backlog — 50 
percent for NPDES permits and 60 percent for state permits. Our goal is 
to get current and remain current in five years. 


157 


The I authority' s plan is to pay for the beefed up inspection and permit 
programs through higher fees for permit holders. The management plan, in 
other words, is to have the permit holders pay for services rendered. 

Another part of the Puget Sound plan, as you heard earlier, includes a 
campaign to reduce nonpoint pollution. This includes some sensitive 
management decisions for Ecology, which must approve local nonpoint 
reduction plans, step in and develop plans where local officials fail to 
do a priority watershed plan or use our enforcement authority to require 
locals to prepare and implement a plan. 

We will have to work closely with local government so it will not invest 
in plans we can't approve. 

A major component of nonpoint plans involves land use decisions, and this 
is obviously sensitive ground for the department. The idea of the state 
stepping in to develop local priority watershed plans is untried and will 
be an area to watch in the future. 

All of our new initiatives will involve new people -- lots of them. A key 
issue, as we prepare to get legislative approval of the plan, is the speed 
with which we can implement it. 

We have serious questions about how fast we can gear up. How big a talent 
pool is there to hire from? How long will it take to hire new employees? 
Can we find enough office space to house them? How quickly can we get the 
equipment needed to support them? What about training demands? 

We have heard that when the Chesapeake Bay plan was approved and Maryland 
was gearing up to start work, it took two and a half years to hire 43 
people. 

We are currently looking at a far more aggressive schedule. One plan 
calls for the addition of 12 new employees a month over a two-year period. 
That amounts to 288 new employees in an agency which now has about 700. 

As I mentioned earlier, one of or key goals must be to develop a workable 
implementation plan and realistic expectations. 

We have been very fortunate in Washington to have a governor. Legislature 
and general public which is willing to chart an aggressive course of 
pollution control. But with those bold mandates came some high 
expectations. 

As managers, we not only have to do a good job implementing those plans 
but also temper their enthusiasm and expectations so we have a realistic 
plan. 

It would be unfortunate to lose our momentum just because we were unable 
to meet unrealistic public expectations. 


158 


LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND CLEAN WATER: FULFILLING THE AGENDA 


Tim Douglas, Mayor 
Bellingham, Washington 


The Puget Sound Water Quality Authority has set out an ambitious 
agenda. Never have we had a more thorough outline of water quality 
issues and potential solutions. True, sewer and water traditionally 
have been local government services. However, non-point source 
control, industrial pre-treatment, drainage utilities, and stringent 
land use regulations are new territory. With a Puget Sound price tag 
in excess of $2 billion, clean water must be balanced with other 
economic pressures of the new federalism. 

Secondary Treatment 

Until the past three years, secondary treatment in Puget Sound was more 
a question of if than when. Many communities had been encouraged to 
pursue waivers because they ranked lower in priority than projects 
elsewhere in the country. That course suddenly shifted with EPA denial 
of the Seattle Metro waiver. 

No one yet knows the actual cost of compliance. What Is clear is that 
the federal-state-local partnership rapidly Is eroding. Ironically, 
communities which were too low in priority to receive federal funding 
now must go to secondary treament when federal dollars are disap¬ 
pearing. The federal mandate continues, but funding Is down and grants 
are converting to loans. Local political support might have been there 
at 90% funding, but the climate changes when ratepayers have to 
shoulder 60% or more of the cost. 

In Bellingham's case, a secondary plant will cost $36.5 million—the 
most massive public works project in the city's hisotry. Rates will 
triple or quadruple. Our food processing Industry may vanish. In 
other communities such as Anacortes, bond counsels are pessimistic. 

The city's economic base simply is inadequate to convince Investors 
that such a project is a good risk. 


159 



While the State of Washington has levied a tobacco tax to fund 
secondary treatment, new water quality issues already are straining the 
$40-45 million avalable each year. As a result. Office of Financial 
Management's recently issued report recommends financing at only a 20 % 
grant level. That is far short of the 50% of eligible costs which had 
been expected. Rather than spread resources so thin, a Puget Sound 
plan for compliance should stagger the deadlines for plant operation 
over a longer period. 

Since secondary treatment is mandated by the federal and state 
governments, it deserves solid financial assistance from those same 
governments. We must maintain the partnership which existed when clean 
water initiatives were launched. If local resources are depleted to 
achieve secondary treatment, there will be no money left to respond to 
other water quality problems 

Local Responsibility 

Puget Sound Water Quality Authority's September 1986 draft plan was 
highly proscriptive. It required non-point programs to address either 
agricultural practices or septic systems. It designated counties as 
lead agencies for non-point programs. Reaction to the draft was quick 
and clear: local governments wanted more flexibility to define local 
problems and priorities. 

Puget Sound is composed of many subbasins and watersheds. Some are 
highly urbanized, while others are rural or timbered. Some watersheds 
fall entirely within a single political jurisdiction. Others encompass 
several cities and even more than one county. While the 
Olympia-Tacoma-Seattle-Everett corridor is rapidly urbanizing, 
communities north of Puget Sound proper show much slower growth. 

In light of these factors, the Authority altered the plan. Local 
governments now must inventory their own watersheds, identify priority 
issues and develop action plans. These must be approved by the 
Department of Ecology. The specific structure for completing the 
process is left up to local jurisdictions. If they fail to establish a 
process, the Department of Ecology may impose one. Deadlines are 
clear. This approach places responsibility squarely on the shoulders 
of local governments. State government cannot be blamed for imposing 
an inappropriate or duplicative structure. 

The process lends itself to public education. That is essential. Some 
of the most effective water quality measures involve changes in 
lifestyle. For example, inappropriate disposal of household toxic 
wastes, oil runoff from driveways, pesticide, fertilizer and herbicide 
misuse all contribute to pollution. Forest management and agricultural 
practices do affect stream loading of sediments and fecal coliform. 
Changes in practice may occur as quickly through education as they will 
through enforcement. 


160 



Alternatives 


Local governments need regulator flexibility so that new methods can be 
employed. While it is our obligation to demonstrate the effectiveness 
of a particular process, agencies must not be so locked into certain 
technologies that they cannot entertain alternatives. Options should 
be authorized where they do not compromise standards in any meaningful 
way. 

There is some evidence now that industrial pre-treatment has reduced 
pollution loading in Puget Sound by 50% during the past decade. If 
that is at all accurate, investment in keeping toxins from “entering 
the pipe" may be far more cost effective than treatment at the end. 
Today's technology-based standard does not permit considering options. 
We may heavily invest in the wrong answers to our problem. 

Financing alternatives are important, especially in Washington State 
where the constitution vigorously prohibits the lending of the State's 
credit. Privatization is being pursued by at least one community. 
Others would benefit if staggered payments were made over a 20-year 
period rather than a lump sum payment immediately. However, debate 
continues about the Legislature's authority to obligate a future body 
to such a contract. 

There is general concensus that financing technical assistance right 
now is less important than bricks and mortar. Projects to eliminate 
combined sewer overflows, service homes with dysfunctional on-site 
systems, and improve treatment are urgent and costly. Money should 
help us ^ the things we need to more than tell us how to do it. 

Local governments may be faulted for being too pragmatic. However, as 
multi-purpose governments, we do have broad ranging responsibilities. 
Ratepayer revolt and land use politics have yet to emerge in Puget 
Sound water quality issues. Utilities and land use policies 
traditionally have been the prerogative of local government. Public 
resistance could stymie some very progressive policies. To gain and 
retain public support, government must demonstrate that solutions are 
thoughtful and cost effective. We must not only endorse objectives at 
all government levels, but commit to sensible methods of achieving 
them. Local governments need a responsive ear in the Congress and 
regulating agencies. Then, we can indeed look forward to a cleaner 
Puget Sound. 


161 





fill « 

i » 


wiTm iirsui^ * 

l*''«ir.SS t'♦af •'Jit*4 %j*c*' ■'>ii^' - T 

PtK < > mlv ■ ;♦» « *i U V ,f ^ 

*rf'^>,-««)•*■ •-r-.vrv 1 33i«JrJMV»-*(' •••^^^V-' ''-!■’•**V«*l 

4- ., • n K'^ ^* 


•■'lif 


- I 0 f. jj 




-*» »*4 »'*' ' ' •** <r * ’• ‘ 

Jt*4y 

• * h jJV: 'P ■•r' ^Tg K r ^ t* .m^ s4 0l . 

.ipfdiitq (# 

»* _-__e4ii^ilJVj 

. - ' i 

fhsifii‘ 

I t^l. 


;T»( 1 T 


^■v f» f f H r .li, ■ ‘ 

«.a*i»h*,<»;- 

» •*' ■*'! Wl 

t/ 4 bo/■■ • 

’iT" ; i4V''nr tflVft'-' <i« 


»IK4y||l5^j4-,vA 


«Vf ^ 

. -- 

»• x'i- 

gnrY(l4i(nifi^ni|if9ltt. * • 

t |l•**tB*MM'*!•■■ • "F ■!♦'.• t.!l,t 
, ' *'•■♦**’ ^' ■'* 


lif< M ' 1 




•!»».1|I* --W 

*^1' 4 f 


)«iii£*' *■•■■? XI i' 11' '<*a -I 


I*!*’ ‘ 

ST’ - '. 

I» -I!•* •: ‘-‘5*h« <?T!»wt!iMaj®; 

■ if ■ HrvtftT ,■, •.■•.■ y.,'.*' JV<v-r {(-B.r'., ., I.J. 

21 '•i; ' ; :•<»/^->,#4-i*%'^iiiui'•0 vwi «?»»s«r--‘’'‘» 

■’24mv ah 

A-- f , F >r .»I* -. >• I' ‘rhs * -t. 1 2aiu ’W" 

■‘ ' ' *-« w^ T''*’ ,'^-' - 7*^“*f.,., 

• •<*’». J»k ftf- 'i: v4/*J , i*''''^-1'* . 

y,. -, r i ’'i» . > 1 4*‘ 





loat" W •> ’'•' ' 

u “» */■* 

.-T: 

IP liM ■*««» ’ ^ ^ f'r ' ia i 

: ftV. , 


:■•■','■■ ■'J . J>>Uj 

• ^ t' . M- 

I.r.«/ tis#‘ Lvi?;'4*:?;;v 


«i C‘ •il 







OEP^ 



Stimulating America s Progress 
1913-1988 



BCE 







^ o . 
Sd. 

B11 ^ \V 


» O-^ » 

° '* 


"y.. ^'^ 3 =*/,. o\;* 



AO^ 

# (M' \f ”' ^ ‘ 

■^«.«?% -.•?>"^. ■>«® ° <^\ 

<r X v 

‘-A ’ ”cP .'‘ 




i % 

•f 




-V ^ "“’ftltiny^ *« y**^ 

■«\''° CO"=., V *' “^°o°' ‘ 4 - 


: ''^o *.^K: "'of « 

'< 5 ^" * »>?•■’ 

V A ^ .«» -<^ ^rA^^/V,0 '^f. 

■;.. <• 


• ^<r„ 


W»*; V £i®* n 

'^ov^ ,°'^^‘ '^S* R"^ *^»* t§ 




^_._. .. ...._ 

« SSS!. r 

.c,.p. X ^ X »* »T^ O c3’^v o ~ 

\‘'° ’ ^'’-' '<,\ " “ ” ‘ o^ » “ '•' ^ 


^'^J' 

^ 'VC? 

O’ 

4> <y %<' 


-I.-, G'^ A/ C; ^\e(r^% ^ A 

. ■"bv^'‘ ""ov^ f-^^'. W .'•^^»-‘ o- 

^oo' .o’ ’•* 




» ov 
»° 



</* ^ 


Qv. »n* <y .**,. . 1 • o^ '■✓'^ 


-^v.. ,. „\:®* 

/ A'; 

\^P/ 


r ** ° *" ^V * 


VCb 




V/ ^o „ j. 

Ao A 

° ^'^{l’’ »• 

’» o v*, * 

.o’ V» 


») 

' A> ^X’’ ^ 4, ■Q-.’' "(J^, 

^ LI a ^o ^ }. 

'O. ' 

<f A <i .sf5?!^WSs. '*' ^v A A ^ ^0(?5%z, •!> 


o •^ 5 . 

o V*^ o 
-0 


■’j'Cj^ 

c ..'J>’^ 

4» <y^ \ 

-b-' A ! 

^ 'O 

: ° 

o’' ^O 


W 

• • ‘4!. -.?4“« ' ° o4^%4'° ’ ’ ’ o4“ ^- ' 

. w ^ - ,> vyf ^P » Q^ 

4-°* ' >; 

y On 




> %»* * jy 




^■< . ’ “ ’'4"^'°“°’o'^°^’-’ * 

^ 5 ^. 4,’^’'A? * y -.«W'.. -Ml. 

Deacidified using the Bookkeeper pro 

z •> “ *“ ^ Z Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 

O Treatment Date: Feb. 2004 I 

PreservationTechnoloc 

AU/nRiniPAncOlMDADCDBBeee nte:, 




>>.A ' 


Vcb 

' O <v- o • ^ A^ 

Cp4' 


4?>°.4 

"•' *'14 • • f%.'’''°'’° 

V s ^ (y^ 

^ A A. *fci<n>»«x- «6 ’<4^ 







' n * 


L; "-j. 

L* 4^^% °o^^*“ '^\ 4 k \ 

o\^S»' %-f °,^m; :m& 

o :„»». 


^/*o 

5 »''A* 


,;' o v//^gA\y «* » 

* a 5 ^ '^ 1 * '* ^ 0^ ^ />.■ Ay '^A/' 


VV 

f^'Cr 




o. 

* -^Y z^S-- ■ 4mp ; ^ 

^4^, <-'>,\"° • ^ cO» = . ^ . 

: V : • V ” 

O »Pvv , • <^0^ “ 

^.'.0«oO*V \\^V 

^ 1 ^ RK/Vi o '^* ^ ^ 


op 

- .g--a. * fl^' . 

cp>i;^X'° ’ *^V' ’ “ l/t'i;^^\''’”’" 5?=^ 

• v^p.o \^m: ' 

''o. - ^o. 


: Mk^ s^m 


o ,4^'^a o 

y \\ 

^ 'P • t, Xi> 

* rX<^ . Crf G ❖ i3a/t7?>, « V. 


,'^ O' 


o /«»% 

> "t, cP ^ae/r?Z^^ o M>. ^ ^ ^ 'ti? O^ ■I'V 


s^ r' ✓ — 


*0p^* • • f ^^‘“““’o^® <■' * ok 

V 1)* ^ ❖ Qjb ^ ^ a • 





— 6, .,;«». • ''o> °'^®* - 

« I . -N\W/h-O .^V 

<1v 



•>t: a.>.5 >5^ 










































